DO  NOT    REMOVE 

:   BOG.  ;[= 


\  f- 


to 


University  Research  Library 


This  book  is  DUE  on  last  date  stamped  beiow 


-  3  1924 
R  1  0  1925 


^§  ?  c 


^  D?"^ 


10  I9t8 


LABOR  AND  DEMOCRACY 


jl^^^ 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

NEW  YORK    •    BOSTON    •    CHICAGO    •    DAiXAS 
ATLANTA    •    SAN  FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO..  Limited 

LONDON    •     BOMBAY    •    CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OF  CANADA.  Ltd. 

TORONTO 


LABOR   AND 
DEMOCRACY 


BY 

WILLIAM  L.  HUGGINS 

PRESIDING  JUDGE,    KANSAS  COURT  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS 


47717 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

1922 

All  rights  rr served 


PRINTED   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES   OF  AMERICA 


Copyright,  1922, 
By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 


Set  up  and  printed.     Published  June,    1922. 


Press  of 

J.  J.  Little  &  Ives  Company 

New  York,  U.  S.  A, 


THE  OLD  GOVERNMENT  AND  THE  NEW 
INDUSTRY 

"We,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to 
form  a  more  perfect  Union,  establish  justice,  insure 
domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense, 
promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings 
of  liberty  for  ourselves  and  our  posterity,  do  ordain 
and  establish  this  Constitution  for  the  United  States  of 
America." — Preamble  Constitution  of  United  States. 

These  are  the  prime  objects  of  government : 

To  Establish  Justice 
To  Insure  Domestic  Tranquillity 
To  Provide  for  the  Common  Defense 
To  Promote  the  General  Welfare 
To  Secure  the  Blessings  of  Liberty 


After  almost  one  century  and  a  half  of  effort,  our 
government, — the  people's  government, — is  still  strug- 
gling to  achieve  these  objects.  If  the  near  future  is 
to  bring  success,  zve  must  help  now. 


PREFACE 

In  this  little  volume  the  author  has  endeavored  to  dis- 
cuss in  plain  and  concise  language  the  relations  betv^^een 
government  and  modern  industrial  conditions,  to  point  out 
some  of  the  dangers  to  democratic  institutions  inherent  in 
the  present  labor  movement,  to  carefully  appraise  the 
rights  of  labor,  of  capital  and  of  the  public,  to  suggest 
legal  principles  upon  v^rhich  remedial  legislation  may  be 
based  and  briefly  to  give  the  first  results  of  an  experiment 
in  adjudicating  industrial  disputes.  No  attempt  is  made 
to  exalt  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act,  but  on  the  contrary  the 
analysis  of  that  Act  as  found  in  these  pages  is  intended 
only  to  describe  an  experiment  which  is  being  made  by 
government  to  function  in  the  preservation  of  the  public 
peace,  the  protection  of  the  public  health,  and  the  promo- 
tion of  the  public  welfare.  The  Kansas  Industrial  Law  is 
an  experiment  in  government  and  is  not  intended  as  a 
solution  of  a  problem  in  sociology.  It  is  based  upon  the 
idea  that  a  duty  rests  upon  government,  to  protect  the 
general  public  from  the  evils  of  industrial  warfare  as  well 
as  from  the  evils  of  internecine  strife  or  foreign  invasion. 
It  is  hoped  that  high  school  and  college  students  and  citi- 
zens generally  will  find  the  text  readable — even  interest- 
ing. In  the  footnotes  will  be  found  citations  to  authori- 
ties which,  if  carefully  studied,  will  enable  any  person 
who  desires  it  to  acquire  a  very  comprehensive  knowl- 
edge of  the  subjects  discussed  in  the  book.  It  is  hoped 
that  lawyers  at  any  rate  will  find  these  citations  valuable. 

This  question  has  been  considered  by  many  men  and 


viii  PREFACE 

many  governments  for  many  years.  Steam  and  electric 
power  and  modern  machinery  have  materially  changed  the 
relationship  hetween  employer  and  employee.  The  mod- 
ern husiness  corporation  and  the  modern  trades  union 
have  naturally  and  properly  evolved  out  of  these  changed 
conditions  and  relations.  The  conflict  of  interest  between 
the  employing  corporation  (concerned  primarily  with  divi- 
dends) on  the  one  hand,  and  the  organized  employees 
(concerned  primarily  with  wages  and  working  conditions) 
on  the  other,  was  overlooked  by  government  so  long  as  the 
public,  the  general  citizenship,  was  not  seriously  affected. 
Unfortunately,  the  conflict  has  often  resulted  in  economic 
waste,  disturbances  of  the  peace,  denial  of  individual  lib- 
erty, suffering  and  want.  It  has  affected  sometimes  con- 
siderable sections  of  the  country,  and  at  other  times  the 
entire  nation.  Such  governmental  agencies  as  have  been 
provided  for  the  solution  of  these  problems  and  for  the 
protection  of  the  public  have  proved,  to  say  the  least, 
inadequate. 

The  International  Association  of  Rotary  Clubs  at  the 
convention  at  Salt  Lake  City  in  1919  adopted  a  resolution 
calling  upon  local  clubs  to  discuss  and  consider,  during 
the  succeeding  year,  questions  affecting  the  relations  be- 
tween employer  and  employee.  The  bill,  which  when 
passed  by  the  legislature  and  approved  by  the  governor, 
became  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law,  came  out  of  that  dis- 
cussion. The  author  of  the  bill,  in  drafting  the  same,  used 
his  Rotary  speech  of  a  few  weeks  previous  as  an  outline. 
Rotarians  in  many  parts  of  the  country  have  greatly 
pleased  the  author  of  this  little  volume  by  frankly  admit- 
ting that  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law  was  evolved  pri- 
marily out  of  the  activities  of  Rotary.  The  inspirational 
value  of  Rotary  principles  and  the  hearty  support  and  en- 
couragement of  Rotarian  comradeship  are  gratefully  ac- 
knowledged. 


CONTENTS 

PART  ONE 

TOPIC  PAGE 

A   Lapse  of  the  Law i 

A  Few  of  the  Fundamentals  of  Democracy  .           ...  3 

Economic  Pressure 7 

Conservation  of  Industrial  Resources  .  ' 9 

Political  Pressure 9 

Some   Examples 11 

Government  of  Law 12 

Class    Rule — -. — : — T" 13 

The  Liberty  of  the  Individual 15 

Equal  Opportunity  .     .  - 17 

Socialism  No  Remedy 20 

The  Business  Corporation  and  the  Labor  Union  ...  22 

The  Terror  of  Unemployment 24 

The  Investor's  Interest  and  the  Worker's  Wage  ...  25 

The  Citizen  of  the  Future 28 

The  Triumph  of  Democracy 29 

The  Need  of  Legislation 30 

The  Courts 34 

The  Psychology  of  the  Present  Labor  Leadership     .     .  40 

ix 


X  CONTENTS 

topic  page 

Not  Hasty  Legislation 41 

The  Ten  Industrial  Commandments 47 


PART  TWO 

SUBJECT— A    FEW   OF  THE  FUNDAMENTALS   OF 
THE  KANSAS  INDUSTRIAL  LAW 

The  Legislative  Declaration 49 

The  Public's  Interest  Stated  and  Defined 51 

The  Ancient  Landmarks  of  the  Common  Law  ....  53 

The  Application  of  Ancient  Principles  to  Modern  Con- 
ditions          55 

Limitations  on  State  Regulation 59 

Necessity  of  Continuity  of  Operation 60 

The   Police   Power 62 

In  Case  of  Emergency 63 

Labor  also  Impressed  with  a  Public  Interest  ....  66 

The  Even  Balance  of  the  Scales  of  Justice     ....  67 

Is  the  Industrial  Controversy  Justiciable? 68 

The  Adjudication  Exemplified 69 

Some  of  the  Penalties  Prescribed yz 

Industrial  Wrongs  and  Their  Remedies 74 

Some  Observations  upon  "Due  Process  of  Law"   ....  78 

The  Penal  Sections  of  the  Law 80 

The  Nature  of  the  Tribunal 83 

Involuntary  Servitude 89 

Involuntary  Idleness 90 

Judicial  Support — Fundamentals  of  Industrial  Act  .     .  91 


CONTENTS  XI 

PART  THREE 

SUBJECT.     INTERESTING  INCIDENTS  IN  THE  AD- 
MINISTRATION  OF  INDUSTRIAL  JUSTICE 

TOPIC  PACE 

"His   Majesty  the  King"  Meets  the  Law 93 

The  Occasion  of  the  First  Unlawful  Strike   ....  97 

The  Sacred  Right  to  Work 99 

Resume  of  the  First  Eighteen  Months'  Administration 

OF  the  Industrial   Act 102 

The  Law  and  Labor 103 

The  Minimum  Wage 104 

Original  Investigations 105 

Intangible  Values 106 

Reducing  Strikes  to  the  Vanishing  Point 106 

Program  for  Resuming  Coal  Production  in  Kansas  .     .  11 1 

The   Law   Is   Vindicated 114 

The  Tests  of  the  Law 115 

An   III   Founded   Objection 116 

A  Thoughtless  Criticism 118 

The  Kansas  Experiment 121 

PART  FOUR 

(APPENDIX) 

Introductory  Note 125 

Social   Rights   of   Workers    .     ' 126 

"Is  There  a  Labor  Problem?" — Topeka  Rotary  Speech   .  128 

The  Industrial  Act 141 

The  Topeka  Edison  Case  (defining  a  fair  wage)   .     .     .  158 

Case  of  the   Workers    and    Management   of   Joplin    & 

Pittsburg  Railway  Company  (discussing  8-hour  day)  169 


Xll  CONTENTS 

TOPIC  PAGE 

The  Milleijs'   Case    (economic  law  vs.   statutory  law)  178 

Fort  Scott  Sorghum-Syrup  Co.  vs.  Its  Workers    (modi- 
fying the  "one-man-one-job"  rule) i83 

Workers   vs.  Wolft  Packing  Company    (discussing  the 

irreducible  minimum  in  wage) 195 

Orders  Issued  in  First  Coal  Investigation 209 

The   Court  of  the   Penniless   Man 211 


LABOR  AND  DEMOCRACY 

PART  ONE 
LIBERTY  AND  THE  UNION 

A  LAPSE  OF  THE  LAW 

In  the  summer  of  1894  three  friends  met  in  the 
reading  room  of  the  Masonic  lodge  in  Emporia,  Kan- 
sas. Two  of  them  were  employees  of  the  Santa  Fe 
railway  company  working  as  switchmen  in  the  Em- 
poria yards.  The  other  was  a  young  school  teacher 
who  was  "reading"  law  on  the  side.  The  subject  of 
the  conversation  was  the  threatened  strike  of  the  rail- 
road men  of  the  country.  Eugene  V.  Debs,  since  con- 
fined in  the  Federal  penitentiary  at  Atlanta,  Georgia, 
on  a  conviction  of  disloyalty,  was  the  head  of  the 
American  Railway  Union  and  had  threatened  to  call  a 
general  strike  in  sympathy  with  certain  workmen  in 
the  paint  department  of  the  Pullman  car-works  at 
Chicago.  The  two  railway  men  in  the  little  group  men- 
tioned were  downcast.  They  said  it  looked  to  them 
that  a  strike  would  be  called  and  they  would  have  to 
walk  out.  The  school  teacher  insisted  that  they  didn't 
have  to  walk  out ;  that  they  had  no  interest  in  the 
trouble  at  the  Pullman  car-works  and  no  knowledge  as 

I 


2  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

to  the  merits  of  the  controversy.  The  railway  men 
said  if  they  didn't  walk  out,  if  the  strike  should  be 
called,  they  would  be  branded  as  "scabs"  in  every  labor 
union  in  the  country ;  that  they  would  be  condemned 
by  labor  organizations  everywhere.  Shortly  afterward 
the  strike  was  called  and  the  result  is  history.  In  and 
about  Chicago  the  strike  soon  developed  into  riot  and 
riot  into  rebellion.  The  president  of  the  United  States 
called  out  the  Federal  troops.  The  United  States 
courts  issued  injunctions.  The  men  lost  the  strike  and 
order  was  restored.  The  two  Emporia  men  tried  to  get 
their  jobs  back.  They  were  refused  employment. 
They  applied  to  the  Union  Pacific,  to  the  Rock  Island, 
to  the  Missouri,  Kansas  and  Texas  Railway,  and  even 
to  the  Missouri  Pacific, — always  with  the  same  result. 
It  dawned  upon  them  that  they  were  blacklisted.  One 
of  these  men  had  a  young  wife  and  two  little  children. 
His  funds  became  exhausted.  Work  was  impossible 
to  obtain  for  the  country  was  full  of  idle  men.  He 
finally  undertook  farming.  He  was  not  prepared  for 
that  vocation  in  funds  or  by  experience.  His  wife  and 
children  suffered  hardships  which  can  be  imagined 
only  by  those  who'  have  experienced  something  of  the 
same  trials.  The  other  was  a  single  man.  He  dis- 
appeared from  Emporia,  Six  or  eight  months  after- 
ward the  school  teacher  got  a  letter  from  him  in  which 
he  stated  that  he  had  broken  through  the  blacklist  and 
obtained  a  position  as  a  beginner  on  a  railroad  in  a 
remote  section  of  the  country.  He  had  changed  his 
name. 

The  young  school  teacher  proceeded  to  read  law. 
He  learned  a  few  of  the  old  legal  maxims.     Sir  Wil- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  3 

Ham  Blackstone  had  said  that  such  is  the  genius  of  the 
common  law  that  it  affords  a  remedy  for  every  wrong 
that  may  be  committed  against  any  man's  person  or 
property.  "Justice,"  Sir  Wilham  said,  "should  be 
carried  to  every  man's  door."  Here  was  a  wrong  com- 
mitted against  person  and  property.  By  a  force  which 
they  could  not  resist  these  men  had  been  driven  from 
their  work.  Their  personal  liberty  had  in  that  way 
been  taken  away  from  them.  They  had  been  robbed 
of  the  right  to  labor  and  earn  a  living — a  property 
right.  This  had  all  been  accomplished  by  the  strike 
forced  upon  them  by  Debs,  as  head  of  the  organiza- 
tion, and  by  the  blacklist  which  had  been  lifted  as  a 
bar  against  them  by  their  former  employers.  The  school 
teacher  was  puzzled.  The  maxims  of  the  law  aforesaid 
seemed  to  have  failed.  There  was  no  remedy  for  these 
wrongs  afforded  by  the  laws  of  the  land.  Justice  could 
not  be  carried  to  the  door  of  these  Emporia  men.  In 
fact,  there  was  no  door  open  to  them  leading  into  any 
judicial  tribunal  of  the  country. 

A  FEW  OF  THE  FUNDAMENTALS  OF  DEMOCRACY 

In  the  broad,  general  sense  of  the  term,  Americans 
are  democrats.  We  have  firm  faith  in  what  has  been 
called  "a  representative  democracy,"  but  is  otherwise 
termed,  "a  republic."  In  the  republic  or  representa- 
tive democracy  so  much  power  as  is  consistent  with 
strength  and  efficiency  in  government  should  be  re- 
tained by  the  general  citizenship.  In  a  democracy  the 
will  of  the  majority  -when  legally  expressed  becomes 
the  law  of  the  land.     Perhaps  no  better  definition  of 


4  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

democracy  has  been  given  than  that  famous  statement 
of  Abraham  Lincoln  in  his  Gettysburg  address  :  "Gov- 
ernment of  the  people,  by  the  people,  for  the  people." 
Modern  democracy  is  in  no  danger  from  despotism  in 
the  form  of  monarchy.  The  Great  War  settled  that 
issue.  And  yet  the  American  people  seem  to  be  losing 
faith  in  the  fundamentals  of  democracy.  It  seems  that 
the  very  foundations  of  our  government  are  being 
undermined  by  treacherous  foes  who  gain  access  to  our 
democratic  household  by  the  arts  of  the  hypocrite  and 
the  sycophant.  In  the  name  of  liberty  and  justice  they 
seek  to  destroy  democracy.  We  are  now  in  the  midst 
of  the  most  serious  times  in  the  history  of  this  govern- 
ment aside  from  the  first  three  years  of  the  Civil  War. 
Our  optimistic  friends  may  ridicule  the  idea  that 
democracy  is  threatened  in  this  country  and  yet  the 
fact  that  the  government  of  the  United  States  is  chal- 
lenged by  a  large  and  vicious  element  who  demand  bol- 
shevism  in  the  place  of  democracy  is  so  apparent  that 
it  cannot  be  misunderstood.  Now,  what  is  bolshevism  ? 
The  definition  of  Bolshevism  is  as  simple  as  Abraham 
Lincoln's  definition  of  Democracy.  Bolshevism  is  a 
government  of  a  class,  by  a  class,  for  a  class.  The 
government  of  the  United  States  was  compelled  to 
recognize  the  danger  from  that  source  during  the  Great 
War  and  to  some  extent  since  the  war.  Our  govern- 
ment has  hunted  down,  arrested,  put  in  jail,  and  de- 
ported many  of  these  agitators  who  are  demanding  the 
overthrow  of  a  republican  form  of  government  and  the 
substitution  therefor  of  a  government  founded  upon 
the  principle  of  class  rule.  We  are  confronted  in  this 
country  by  an  organized  and  powerful  group  of  people 


LABOR     AND     DJ'MOCRACY  5 

who  think  their  first  duty  is  not  to  the  government  of 
the  United  States  nor  to  the  government  of  the  state 
m  which  they  Hve,  but  to  some  private  organization, 
corporation,  union,  lodge,  or  association.  We  are,  as 
stated  by  Justice  Brewer  in  the  Debs  case  in  1895,  con- 
fronted with  a  situation  in  which  "individuals  are  seek- 
ing to  exercise  powers  which  belong  only  to  govern- 
ment." ^ 

Let  us  not  deceive  ourselves  in  this  m.atter.  As  it 
was  stated  so  dramatically  and  so  prophetically  many 
years  ago  by  the  typical  American,  "This  nation  can- 
not long  exist  half  slave  and  half  free,  for  a  house 
divided  against  itself  must  fall,"  so  it  may  be  said 
as  confidently  today,  "This  nation  cannot  long  exist 
half  democratic  and  half  bolshevic,  for  a  house  divided 
against  itself  must  fall."  What  we  should  do  today 
is  to  reconsecrate  ourselves  to  the  principles  of  democ- 
racy as  exemplified  by  our  forefathers  in  the  beginning 
of  this  republic.  We  ought  to  reestablish  that  loyalty 
to  democratic  principles  which  we  should  have  had  all 
the  time.  We  ought  to  learn  from  the  experiences  of 
recent  years  that  loyalty  to  the  government  of  the 
United  States  is  the  first  recjuisite  of  citizenship,  and 
that  no  man  who  believes  he  owes  a  higher  loyalty  to 
any  other  government,  institution,  or  organization  has 
any  right  to  live  in  this  country.  No  man  is  a  good 
citizen  who  believes  that  he  owes  a  higher  allegiance 
to  his  labor  union,  to  his  lodge,  to  his  church,  to  his 
political  party,  or  to  the  foreign  land  of  his  birth  than 
to  the  government  of  the  United  States  or  to  the  state 
in  which  he  lives.     No  man  who  conducts  himself  in 


*  In  re  Debs :  158  U.  S.  564,  39  Law  Ed.  1092. 


D  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

this  fashion  should  be  granted  the  protection  of  the 
law  which  he  despises  and  no  penalty  which  can  be  in- 
flicted upon  that  kind  of  a  man  is  too  severe.  "Speak 
softly  but  carry  a  big  stick"  is  a  motto  which  was  very 
popular  a  few  years  ago.  If  the  author  of  that  motto 
were  now  living,  no  doubt  he  would  revise  it  to  read : 
"Speak  firmly  and  carry  a  big  stick." 

The  rule  of  the  majority, — 

The  willing  submission  of  the  minority  to  that 
rule, — 

The  largest  liberty  of  the  individual  consistent  with 
the  general  welfare, — 

Equality  of  opportunity, — 

These  are  a  few  of  the  fundamentals  of  democracy. 

The  will  of  the  majority  is  recorded  in  the  statu- 
tory laws  of  the  state  and  nation,  and  the  settled  con- 
viction of  the  majority  is  inscribed  in  the  constitution 
of  the  United  States  and  of  the  several  states  and  in 
the  judicial  decisions  of  the  courts  of  the  land.  The 
courts  function  as  stabilizers  to  stay  public  opinion 
and  prevent  sudden  or  unreasonable  manifestations  of 
popular  will  from  inflicting  injury  upon  the  public,  but 
the  settled  conviction  of  the  majority  has  always  been 
and,  if  democracy  is  to  survive,  must  always  be  re- 
flected in  the  judicial  decisions  of  our  highest  courts. 

Rule  of  the  majority  so  manifested  has  been  chal- 
lenged from  one  end  of  this  land  to  the  other.  There 
is  a  belief  in  the  public  mind  that  big  business  concerns 
and  little  business  concerns  have  taken  advantage  of 
economic  conditions  to  prey  upon  the  general  public 
by  profiteering  prices,  by  restrictions  of  output,  by  ar- 
tificial price  fixing,  by  manipulations  of  the  boards  of 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  7 

trade,  by  adulteration  of  the  product,  and  by  various 
other  methods,  known  and  unknown, — all  in  violation 
of  the  will  of  the  majority  as  expressed  in  the  laws. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  belief  is  prevalent  that  labor 
organizations,  big  and  little,  have  claimed  the  right,  and 
in  some  instances  have  exercised  the  power,  to  prey 
upon  the  general  public,  indirectly  perhaps,  but  never- 
theless with  grievous  results,  by  demanding  that  only 
controlled  and  disciplined  labor  be  employed  in  the  es- 
sential industries,  by  limiting  the  number  of  laborers 
through  unionization,  by  increasing  the  wage,  by  de- 
preciating the  quality  of  the  service  rendered,  by  the 
shortening  of  the  hours,  and  by  denying  to  any  except 
organized  working  men  any  right  to  participate  in  the 
business  activities  of  the  country.  And  so  the  rule  of 
the  majority  fails  and  the  minority  refuses  submission 
thereto. 

ECONOMIC  PRESSURE 

Capital  and  labor  alike  resort  to  "economic  pres- 
sure" so-called  to  accomplish  their  ends, — capital  for 
the  purpose  of  increasing  dividends,  labor  for  the  pur- 
pose of  increasing  wages.  Capital  closes  down  a  plant 
or  takes  its  product  off  the  market  or  combines  with 
other  producers  of  the  same  commodity  to  hold  for  a 
suitable  price.  Or,  if  the  wages  or  the  working  con- 
ditions demanded  by  labor  are  disapproved  by  employ- 
ers, the  lockout  is  resorted  to,  thus  bringing  "economic 
pressure"  to  bear  upon  the  working  men  in  order  to 
force  compliance  with  the  terms  laid  down  by  employ- 
ers.   Organized  labor  calls  a  strike  or  institutes  a  boy- 


8  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

cott,  pickets  the  plant,  denies  the  right  of  others  to 
work,  stops  the  industry,  deprives  capital  of  its  divi- 
dends and  the  public  of  the  products,  disturbs  the  mar- 
ket, throws  other  laboring  men  out  of  emplovment, 
creates  an  artificial  scarcity  of  the  commodity  affected, 
paralyzes  the  business  and  brings  suffering  and  sor- 
row into  the  homes  of  the  land  near  and  far. 

And  this  is  "economic  pressure."  It  is  a  term  which 
has  a  muffled  sound.  It  is  apparently  harmless  but 
"economic  pressure"  is  war.  It  was  "economic  pres- 
sure" brought  to  bear  upon  Germany  and  the  other 
central  empires  in  the  form  of  the  blockade  by  the  sea 
power  of  Britain  and  her  allies,  which  perhaps  more 
than  the  armies  of  Haig,  Foch  and  Pershing  brought 
those  ancient  governments  to  a  tragic  end  and  left  a 
heritage  of  disease,  starvation  and  death  from  which 
those  people  will  not  recover  for  generations  to  come. 
The  blockade  is  the  most  cruel  form  of  warfare  be- 
cause it  strikes  at  the  vitals  of  the  people.  It  affects 
the  poor,  the  weak,  the  aged,  the  helpless,  the  women 
and  children.  It  is  an  expediency  which  no'  civilized 
government  ought  to  use  even  in  war  except  under  the 
most  dire  necessity. 

The  "economic  pressure"  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
public  by  means  of  the  strike,  the  boycott,  or  the  lock- 
out is  not  different  in  its  general  effect  from  "economic 
pressure"  of  the  blockade  in  international  war.  The 
suffering  caused  by  the  strike  or  the  lockout  is  the 
harshest  and  the  most  severe  upon  the  poor,  the  weak, 
and  the  helpless.  It  is  a  most  despicable  method  of 
industrial  warfare  and  is  not  justifiable  under  any  con- 
ditions in  a  land  in  which  law  and  order  hold  sway.    It 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  9 

should  be  condemned  with  the  utmost  severity  when  in- 
dulged in  for  increasing  a  dividend  or  a  wage.  No  gov- 
ernment worthy  of  the  name,  whether  democratic  or 
monarchical  should  permit  its  people  to  become  the  vic- 
tims of  "economic  pressure"  in  time  of  peace.  The 
laws  of  the  land  should  provide  a  means  by  which  the 
controversy  may  be  adjudicated  and  such  a  calamity 
averted  and  "if  the  emergency  arises,  the  army  of  the 
nation  and  all  its  militia  are  at  the  service  of  the  nation 
to  compel  obedience  to  its  laws."  ^ 


CONSERVATION    OF   INDUSTRIAL  RESOURCES 

"Economic  pressure"  means  economic  waste.  We 
have  heard  much  in  recent  years  of  conservation  of 
natural  resources.  As  a  political  issue  "conservation" 
has  been  reasonably  valuable  to  a  number  of  ambitious 
politicians.  Conservation  of  industrial  resources  is  of 
equal  importance.  The  economic  waste  in  this  coun- 
try caused  by  industrial  disturbances  is  colossal. 
Counted  in  dollars  and  cents,  it  amounts  to  figures  that 
are  staggering.  William  Z.  Foster,  labor  leader,  who 
conducted  the  recent  steel  strike,  says  that  struggle 
alone  cost  one  billion  dollars.  If  that  economic  waste 
resulting  from  industrial  warfare  could  be  expressed 
in  terms  of  the  human  suffering  which  it  directly 
causes,  the  story  would  be  appalling.  And  yet  indus- 
trial disputes  are  looked  upon  as  matters  of  private 
interest  only,  subject  to  settlement  by  private  treaty 
or  by  industrial  battle. 

'In  re  Debs:  158  U.  S.  564,  39  Law  Ed.  1092. 


10  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

POLITICAL  PRESSURE 

The  class  consciousness  and  the  class  selfishness 
which  prompt  the  use  of  "economic  pressure"  as  an 
industrial  weapon,  also  make  of  it  a  political  weapon. 
"Vote  only  for  our  friends"  is  the  order  sent  out  from 
the  headquarters  of  the  organization.  In  other  words, 
the  effort  is  made  to  subject  the  power  of  government 
to  the  selfish  ends  of  the  class  which  may,  by  such 
methods,  be  able  to  control  legislation  or  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  law. 

Here  the  general  public  suffers  because  of  its  lack  of 
organization  and  because  of  the  cupidity  of  politicians. 
The  general  public  at  every  election  is  divided  along 
political  party  lines.  Questions  of  moment  to  the  en- 
tire country  divide  honest,  patriotic  and  right-thinking 
men.  The  appeal  to  party  loyalty,  the  diverse  theories 
with  regard  to  matters  of  national  import,  contrary 
views  as  to  foreign  policies,  and  a  multitude  of  mat- 
ters involving  principles  or  policies  of  government 
demand  the  attention  of  the  voter.  All  of  this  results 
in  the  formation  of  two  great  political  parties  claiming 
popular  support.  Now,  the  division  is  often  a  very 
close  one,  a  few  votes  strategically  placed  may  change 
the  results  of  a  national  election.  Shrewd  politicians 
seeking  only  self-interest  are  willing  to  "dicker"  with 
persons  who  have  some  peculiar  influence  over  some 
particular  class  of  voters.  The  Irish  vote,  the  German 
vote,  the  labor  vote,  or  some  other  alleged  bloc  vote, 
supposed  to  be  under  the  control  of  one  or  more  lead- 
ers who  claim  to  be  able  to  deliver  the  same  upon  con- 
tract, is  a  subject  matter  of  barter  between  unscrupu- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  II 

lous  politicians  and  equally  unscrupulous  leaders  of  the 
bloc.  In  their  party  platforms,  political  parties  by  cau- 
tious promises  or  covert  suggestion  "bid"  for  the  bloc 
vote.  Literature  appealing  to  class  prejudice  is  freely 
distributed.  "Stump"  speakers  pander  to  the  cupidity 
or  prejudice  of  the  bloc.  This  is  a  great  menace  to  our 
system  of  government. 

The  rule  of  democracy  must  be  the  rule  of  reason. 
The  appeal  of  democracy  is  the  appeal  to  the  intelli- 
gence and  conscience  of  the  citizen.  The  will  of  the 
majority  must  be  influenced  only  by  facts  and  argu- 
ments appealing  to  the  intelligence  and  the  moral  up- 
rightness of  the  citizenship.  The  promotion  of  the  gen- 
eral welfare  must  be  the  chief  effort.  This  is  the  law 
of  civiHzation.  This  is  what  distinguishes  civilization 
from  savagery.  The  rule  by  economic  and  political 
pressure  is  the  law  of  the  jungle.  It  is  an  appeal  to 
selfishness  or  to  fear.  It  is  duress  and  intimidation.  It 
is  "frightfulness." 

SOME  EXAMPLES 

The  employer  of  a  large  number  of  laboring  men 
serves  notice  upon  his  workers  that  unless  the  wage  is 
reduced  and  the  working  hours  extended,  the  plant  will 
close.  The  closing  of  the  plant  means  hardship,  star- 
vation,— perhaps  disease  and  death, — to  the  little  chil- 
dren in  the  working  man's  home.  The  working  man 
gives  up  his  right  to  a  fair  wage  and  decent  working 
conditions  in  order  to  save  his  wife  and  children. 

An  individual  or  a  collection  of  individuals  combined 
together  as  a  corporation,  owns  an  industry.  This  in- 
dustry may  be  the   fruit  of  a  lifetime  of  hard  work, 


12  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

close  application  to  business,  and  self-denial.  The  hun- 
dreds of  workers  employed  in  the  industry  may  have 
been  paid  a  fair  wage  and  been  given  good  working 
conditions,  but  they  are  organized,  and  in  some  other 
similar  plant,  perhaps  hundreds  of  miles  away,  a  strike 
is  called,  possibly  a  strike  which  is  as  nearly  justifiable 
as  such  things  can  be.  The  employees  of  the  industry 
mentioned  are  ordered  out  upon  a  sympathetic  strike. 
Disobedience  means  persecution,  perhaps  violence.  The 
workers  obey  the  strike  order.  The  business  may  be 
ruined.  The  savings  of  a  lifetime  may  be  destroyed. 
Sorrow,  hardship  and  bitterness  may  come  into  the 
lives  of  honest,  economical,  industrious  people  who 
have  invested  their  slender  competence  in  the  business. 
Under  such  duress  the  management  yields  or  the  busi- 
ness goes  into  bankruptcy. 

In  either  case  there  is  no  contract,  there  is  no  meet- 
ing of  minds,  there  is  no  consideration  of  justice  or 
fair  dealing.  The  rights  of  the  opposite  party  are  not 
considered,  the  rights  of  the  public  are  wholly  ignored, 
there  is  nothing  fair  in  the  transaction.  It  is  govern- 
ment by  intimidation  and  duress. 

A  bandit  kidnaps  the  child  of  a  wealthy  family,  then 
serves  notice  upon  the  distracted  parents  that  unless 
a  large  sum  of  money  be  paid,  the  child's  life  will  be 
taken.  The  bandit  has  committed  a  crime  against  the 
laws  of  the  land  which  horrifies  and  arouses  the  indig- 
nation of  every  normal  human  being.  Every  energy 
of  the  state  is  exerted  to  apprehend  and  bring  him  to 
justice.  In  the  case  of  the  lockout  on  the  one  hand,  or 
the  strike  on  the  other,  a  moral  crime  may  be  involved 
which  in  its  consequences  may  be  more  terrible  by  far. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  I3 

but  the  government  assumes  no  responsibility.     It  is  a 
private  matter. 

GOVERNMENT  OF  LAW 

The  government,  registering  the  will  of  the  majority, 
has  by  law  provided  for  the  peaceful  and  orderly  adju- 
dication of  almost  every  possible  human  controversy 
except  the  industrial  controversy.  The  life,  the  liberty, 
the  property  and  the  domestic  relations  of  every  citi- 
zen are  subject  to  adjudication  by  the  orderly  proc- 
esses of  the  law.  The  industrial  controversy,  affect- 
ing as  it  does  the  most  vital  interests  of  labor  and  capi- 
tal and  of  the  general  public,  has  been  left  to  be  settled 
by  the  sword  and  torch  of  industrial  battle.  If  democ- 
racy, or  any  other  form  of  orderly  government,  is  to 
survive,  some  remedy  must  be  found  for  these  indus- 
trial wrongs.  Socialism,  Communism,  Bolshevism, 
Anarchy, — the  arch  foes  of  all  present  forms  of  or- 
ganized government  find  their  sustenance  in  the  poi- 
soned fruits  from  the  fertile  fields  of  industrial  con- 
troversy. 

CLASS  RULE 

The  greatest  menace  to  democracy  is  the  spirit  of 
bolshevism  that  is  abroad  in  all  the  democratic  coun- 
tries of  the  world.  Many  a  man  is  a  bolshevist  who 
probably  does  not  realize  it.  Class  consciousness  is  the 
essence  of  bolshevism.  Any  man,  be  he  capitalist  or 
pauper,  who  is  willing  to  sacrifice  the  interests  of  the 
general  public  to  the  interest  of  his  own  particular  class 
is,  in  principle,  a  bolshevist.    We  have  had  one  glaring 


14  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

instance  of  bolshevist  principles  temporarily  dominat- 
ing the  democratic  government  of  our  country.  An 
organized  but  meager  minority,  said  to  be  composed 
of  about  eighty  thousand  men  engaged  in  an  essential 
industry,  so  thoroughly  organized  and  so  placed  as  to 
be  able  to  inflict  frightful  injury  upon  the  country,  de- 
manded the  enactment  of  a  law  in  the  interest  of  their 
class.  Congress  and  the  president  were  apparently  not 
favorable  to  the  bill  and  the  prospects  for  its  passage 
were  growing  darker  every  hour.  Notice  was  served, 
publicly  and  brazenly,  that  if  the  bill  were  not  passed,  a 
strike  would  be  called  which  would  utterly  paralyze 
the  internal  commerce  of  the  country  and  "would  leave 
the  public  helpless,  the  whole  people  ruined,  and  all  the 
homes  of  the  land  submitted  to  a  danger  of  the  most 
serious  character."  ^ 

The  bill  was  passed.  It  became  a  Federal  law  and 
its  constitutionality  was  upheld  by  the  greatest  court  in 
the  world,  principally  upon  the  ground  that  the  Con- 
gress had  a  right  to  pass  the  bill  to  avert  such  a  calam- 
ity. Was  that  democracy?  Was  that  the  rule  of  the 
majority?  Is  there  no  danger  from  bolshevism  in  this 
country  ?  Is  "economic  pressure"  exerted  in  this  fash- 
ion permissible  under  the  principles  of  democracy?  If 
that  organized  minority  had  said  to  the  Congress  and 
the  president,  "If  you  do  not  pass  this  bill  and  place 
this  law  upon  the  statute  books,  we  will  appeal  to  the 
general  public  in  the  next  election  to  elect  a  Congress 
and  a  president  who  will  pass  it,"  they  would  have  been 
exercising  only  their  rights  as  citizens  of  this  great  rep- 
resentative democratic  republic.    But  when  they  threat- 

'  New  V.  Wilson,  243  U.  S.  33i,  61  Law  Ed.  755- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  I5 

ened  to  bring  a  dire  calamity  upon  the  country  which 
might  have  brought  sorrow  and  suffering  into  every 
home  in  the  land,  they  were  operating  under  the  prin- 
ciples of  bolshevism.  Such  a  rule  is  not  the  rule  of 
the  majority  but  the  rule  of  the  minority  by  means  of 
intimidation.  It  is  the  threat  of  "frightfulness."  It 
is,  in  essence,  bolshevism. 

THE  LIBERTY   OF  THE  INDIVIDUAL 

"We  hold  these  truths  to  be  self  evident,  that  all  men 
are  created  equal,  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Cre- 
ator with  certain  inalienable  rights,  that  among  these 
are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness." 

Thus  boldly  declared  the  fathers  of  the  republic,  and 
published  to  the  world  on  July  4,  1776.  The  desire  for 
individual  liberty  was  an  inspiring  principle  of  the 
American  Revolution.  For  that  principle  men  "pledged 
their  lives,  their  fortunes,  and  their  sacred  honor." 
For  that  principle  they  resolved  to  "hang  together  or 
hang  separately."  For  that  principle  men  in  all  ages 
and  in  every  civilized  country  have  performed  deeds  of 
valor  which  have  glorified  the  history  of  the  race.  In 
the  liberty  to  pursue  happiness,  the  individual  must  be 
free  to  choose  his  own  vocation,  to  shape  his  own  des- 
tiny, and  to  be  the  master  of  his  own  soul.  The  gov- 
ernment must  protect  him  in  his  right  to  pursue  his 
chosen  vocation,  without  molestation  and  without 
fear.  The  right  to  choose  his  own  vocation  is  insep- 
arably connected  with  his  right  to  private  ownership 
of  property.  Liberty  without  the  right  to  own  his  own 
home  and  to  be  the  master  of  his  own  household  would 


l6  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

be  a  hollow  mockery.  Every  citizen  must  have  the 
right  to  choose  his  own  domicile,  to  choose  his  own 
companion  in  that  domicile,  to  provide  shelter  and  pro- 
tection for  his  offspring  from  the  vicissitudes  of  the 
weather  and  from  the  storms  of  life.  The  right  to  own 
property  is  the  right  which  enables  liim  to  have  his  own 
domicile,  his  own  bed  upon  which  to  sleep,  his  own 
table  upon  which  to  eat,  the  cooking  utensils  with 
which  to  prepare  his  food,  and  the  tools  of  his  trade  by 
which  he  may  earn  his  living.  If  democracy  means  lib- 
erty of  the  individual,  it  means  the  right  to  life,  liberty 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness  and,  as  a  necessary  con- 
sequence, the  right  to  acquire,  own,  hold  and  control 
property  as  well  as  the  right  to  choose  his  own  voca- 
tion. 

This  liberty  must,  of  course,  be  limited  by  law,  for 
every  man's  right  leaves  off  where  his  neighbor's  right 
begins  and  no  man  may  so  use  his  own  as  to  injure 
the  public.  The  government  alone  has  the  authority 
to  circumscribe  this  liberty  and  to  such  extent  as  may 
be  necessary  in  the  promotion  of  the  general  welfare. 
Many  illustrations  might  be  given  of  the  governmental 
right  to  restrict  the  individual  in  the  exercise  of  his 
liberty.  One  instance  will  suffice, — the  state  says  to 
the  individual,  "You  must  send  your  child  to  the 
schools  that  he  may  become  intelligent  and  make  a 
good  citizen."  The  state  furnishes  the  school,  pays  the 
teacher,  provides  the  books,  and  the  child  being  to  that 
extent  the  ward  of  the  state  is  by  the  state  compelled 
to  attend  the  school.  This  is  a  proper  function  of  gov- 
ernment in  the  protection  of  the  state. 

In    recent    times,    however,    private    organizations 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  \J 

sometimes  demand  of  the  individual  that  he  shall  join 
a  class,  that  he  shall  pay  dues,  that  he  shall  submit  to 
discipline,  that  he  shall  work  when  the  organization 
permits  it,  quit  when  the  order  comes,  and  failing 
whereof  he  shall  be  denied  the  privilege  of  working  at 
his  chosen  vocation.  So  his  home  may  be  ruined  and 
his  family  may  suffer.  This  latter  instance  is  a  striking 
example  of  "individuals  seeking  to  exercise  powers 
which  belong  only  to  government."  It  is  said  that 
private  organizations,  carrying  out  the  decrees  ar- 
rived at  in  secret,  frequently  ex*ert  physical  force  as 
against  the  individual  who  refuses  to  be  governed  and 
disciplined  by  the  secret  tribunal.  They  exercise  the 
boycott,  they  ostracize  the  individual  and  his  family, 
they  brand  him  "scab,"  they  drive  him  from  the  com- 
munity in  disgrace.  This  is  the  worst  form  of  tyranny 
that  was  ever  known  within  the  boundaries  of  the 
bnited  States  of  America.  Such  powers  exercised  by 
private  individuals  or  private  organizations  are  plainly 
contrary  to  every  principle  of  democracy  and  no  self- 
respecting  democratic  people  should  tolerate  them. 
Such  powers  properly  belong  "only  to  government." 

EQUAL  OPPORTUNITY 

Equality  of  opportunity  is  essential  in  a  democratic 
state.  People  in  the  exercise  of  individual  liberty  seek 
to  improve  their  condition.  Ambition  impels  men  to 
acquire  education,  to  become  skilled  in  their  chosen 
vocation  or  to  accumulate  property.  While  men  are,  as 
stated  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  "created 
equal,"  that  equality  applies  only  to  their  rights.    They 


l8  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

are  not  created  equal  in  their  capabilities  and  so  where 
one  man  makes  Httle  progress,  another  with  only  equal 
opportunity  becomes  learned  in  his  profession  or  espe- 
cially skilled  in  his  work,  or  develops  an  acquisitive 
power  and  becomes  a  capitalist.  Such  equal  opportun- 
ity is  necessary  to  the  progress  of  the  individual,  and 
the  progress  of  the  individual  is  necessary  to  the  prog- 
ress of  the  race. 

In  monarchial  countries,  and  especially  in  times  past, 
this  natural  tendency  of  mankind  has  enabled  individ- 
uals who  have  been  favored  by  nature  to  establish 
themselves  in  an  exalted  position  and  by  the  power 
thus  acquired  to  perpetuate  that  position  so  that  it 
might  be  passed  down  from  father  to  son  through  gen- 
erations. This  results  in  the  caste  system  and  society 
becomes  so  stratified  that  a  child  born  within  a  cer- 
tain class  must  remain  in  that  class  throughout  his  life. 
Democracy  changes  all  this.  Under  our  democratic 
form  of  government,  we  boast  that  it  is  only  "three 
generations  from  shirt  sleeves  to  shirt  sleeves."  In 
other  words,  an  individual  born  of  parents  in  the  hum- 
ble walks  of  life  finds  the  opportunity  by  which  he 
may  climb  to  the  more  exalted  stations,  and,  conversely, 
the  individual  born  of  parents  highly  placed  in  life  finds 
the  way  clear  by  which  he  may  descend  and  his  chil- 
dren may  be  compelled  to  begin  life  at  the  bottom  of 
the  scale. 

It  was  this  equality  of  opportunity  which  enabled 
Abraham  Lincoln  to  pass  from  the  ranks  of  manual 
labor  to  the  highest  executive  position  in  a  great  na- 
tion, to  become  the  emancipator  of  a  race  and  to  take 
a  place  in  history  so  exalted  that  it  has  not  been  at- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  19 

tained  by  any  individual  "born  to  the  purple."  It  is 
that  equality  of  opportunity  which  enabled  David  Lloyd 
George,  starting  at  the  foot  of  the  economic  ladder, 
to  become  the  ruler  of  the  world's  greatest  empire  and 
to  take  first  rank  among  the  executive  statesmen  of  his 
generation. 

Now,  unless  this  equality  of  opportunity  may  be 
maintained,  such  a  stratification  of  society  will  take 
place  that  democracy  will  be  superseded  by  some 
other  system.  Democratic  government  will  not  put  any 
obstacle  in  the  way  to  prevent  a  child  born  of  humble 
parents  from  working  his  way  up  to  the  more  exalted 
positions.  Private  individuals  should  not  be  permitted 
to  exercise  the  power  to  do  so.  Any  restrictions  placed 
upon  the  right  of  youth  to  learn  a  trade,  to  enter  a 
profession,  to  accumulate  property,  is  a  violation  of 
that  fundamental  principle  of  democracy.  Any  rule  of 
any  organization  which,  for  instance,  arbitrarily  limits 
the  number  of  apprentices  who  may  learn  a  trade  or 
which  prohibits  any  man  from  pursuing  his  chosen 
vocation  in  life,  is  in  conflict  with  this  fundamental 
principle  of  democracy.  A  boy  may  be  sent  to  a  voca- 
tional school  and  he  may  come  from  that  school  a 
highly  skilled  mechanic.  He  may  come  to  his  home 
city  and  may  find  that  he  is  denied  the  right  to  work 
at  his  chosen  trade  or  vocation,  not  by  government  but 
by  some  private  organization  which  assumes  the  right 
and  authority  to  say  he  shall  or  shall  not  work  in  that 
particular  trade  or  vocation. 


20  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

SOCIALISM    NO    REMEDY 

We  are  unmistakably  in  the  midst  of  a  most  brutal 
and  destructive  industrial  warfare.  It  is  world-wide. 
If  prompt  and  concerted  action  be  not  taken,  the  pres- 
ent struggle  may  yet  prove  disastrous  to  liberty  and 
democracy,  and  the  fruits  of  our  recent  military  vic- 
tory may  be  turned  to  ashes.  In  the  midst  of  this 
warfare,  men  are  looking  for  some  means  by  which 
industrial  peace  may  be  restored  and  maintained. 
The  application  and  strict  enforcement  of  the  princi- 
ples of  industrial  justice  by  the  orderly  processes  of 
the  lazv  imll  restore  and  maintain  industrial  peace. 
There  is  no  other  remedy.  Socialism  is  wholly  im- 
practical. It  may  be  that  in  some  Golden  Age  of  the 
future  humanity  may  become  perfect,  selfishness  may 
die  out  of  the  human  heart,  and  everybody  may  love 
his  neighbor  as  himself.  In  that  time  perhaps  social- 
ism will  function  democratically. 

At  the  present  time  it  is  impossible.  The  sacrifice 
of  untold  millions  of  brave  men  fighting  for  democracy 
has  removed,  at  least  for  the  present,  the  danger  of  the 
despotism  of  monarchy.  We  believe  the  sacrifice  was 
warranted  in  order  to  rid  the  world  of  that  danger. 
Yet  none  will  deny  that  civilization  has  steadily  ad- 
vanced even  under  monarchial  governments.  Great 
institutions  of  learning  have  been  firmly  established; 
emperors  and  kings  have  been  enthusiastic  and  con- 
sistent patrons  of  the  arts  and  sciences ;  the  most  mag- 
nificent buildings  have  been  erected;  the  most  beautiful 
pictures  have  been  painted;  the  most  heavenly  music 
has  been  given  to  the  world ;  the  most  inspiring  poems 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  21 

have  been  written,  and  literature  and  religion  have 
flourished  to  enlighten  and  ennoble  the  race — all  under 
the  influence  and  by  the  encouragement  and  support  of 
monarchial  forms  of  government. 

On  the  other  hand,  socialism  in  all  its  phases, 
including  the  later  development  of  bolshevism,  has 
retarded  or  destroyed  civilization ;  it  has  developed  the 
worst  forms  of  tyranny  and  oppression ;  it  has  scoffed 
at  religion  and  desecrated  shrines  and  sanctuaries ;  it 
has  smothered  human  genius  and  prevented  progress  in 
the  arts  and  sciences ;  it  has  no  literature  worthy  of  the 
name;  it  has  accomplished  no  permanent  good,  except 
as  it  has  served  as  a  horrible  example.  Its  ascendancy 
has  resulted  in  the  unbridling  of  the  basest  passions 
of  men  and  in  crimes  unspeakable ;  it  has  ever  been  and 
it  is  now  the  implacable  foe  of  all  that  democracy 
teaches  and  that  democratic  America  holds  dear.  The 
utter  collapse  of  all  that  was  civilization  in  Russia  is 
no  novel  result  of  the  rule  of  socialism.     It  is  typical. 

Socialists  themselves  are  the  best  proof  that  the 
socialistic  scheme  is  worthless.  The  evident  insin- 
cerity of  the  leaders  stands  as  a  constant  reminder  that 
socialism  is  not  only  impractical  but  dangerous.  If 
the  intellectual  leaders  of  socialism  believed  in  their 
own  doctrine,  they  would,  like  the  ancient  Christians, 
demonstrate  it  in  their  lives.  The  socialist  intellec- 
tuals, instead  of  drawing  salaries  from  the  capitalistic 
class  or  from  the  government,  or  engaging  in  business 
as  capitalists  themselves,  or  profiting  by  the  gullibility 
of  their  ignorant  followers,  would  be  in  the  socialist 
colonies  .demonstrating  by  their  deeds  as  well  as  by 
their  words  that  socialism  means  what  it  pretends  and 


22  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

that  it  affords  relief  from  the  alleged  evils  of  the 
capitalistic  system.  Under  the  laws  of  our  country 
there  is  nothing  to  prevent  persons  who  believe  in 
sociaHsm  from  joining  themselves  together  in  socialis- 
tic communities  and  demonstrating  the  principles  which 
they  so  vociferously  propose.  Until  that  is  done 
socialism  will  be  the  mere  dream  of  impractical  theo- 
rists or  the  scheme  of  unscrupulous  leaders  who  may 
use  it  to  further  their  own  selfish  ends,  or  the  means 
for  obtaining  a  little  cheap  notoriety  by  mediocrities 
who  cannot  achieve  honorable  renown. 

Americans,  in  fact  all  the  English-speaking  peoples, 
are  committed  to  the  liberty  and  justice  exemplified  in 
democratic  forms  of  government.  These  should  be 
defended  at  all  hazards,  but  if  it  becomes  necessary 
to  choose  between  the  two  evils  of  monarchy  and  social- 
ism, the  choice  immediately  and  emphatically  should 
be — monarchy. 

THE    BUSINESS    CORPORATION    AND    THE    LABOR    UNION 

Steam  began  it  and  steel,  cement,  electricity  and  gas- 
oline completed  a  w^orld  revolution  in  industry.  Great 
machines  driven  by  forces  of  nature,  harnessed  by  hu- 
man inventions,  have  changed  the  habits,  the  customs, 
and  the  very  life  of  the  race.  In  modern  industry  im- 
mense aggregations  of  wealth,  as  well  as  multitudes  of 
workers,  must  necessarily  be  employed.  The  business 
corporation,  by  means  of  which  very  many  individuals 
may  safely  invest  their  savings  or  their  capital  in  a 
single  enterprise,  is  a  modern  necessity.  Correspond- 
ingly, the  great  numbers  of  workers  employed,  because 
of  their  individual  weakness  and  lack  of  personal  touch 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  23 

with  their  powerful  employer,  are  compelled  to  organ- 
ize in  their  own  protection.  And  so  the  labor  union 
takes  its  place  in  industry  as  a  correlative  of  the  cor- 
poration. In  the  essential  industries  the  individual  em- 
ployer who  knows  his  employees  by  name,  who  is  in 
constant  touch  with  them  and  understands  them,  has 
almost  disappeared.  Practically  all  of  the  big  business 
of  the  country  is  done  through  the  medium  of  the  cor- 
poration whose  capital  stock  is  owned  by  large  num- 
bers of  people.  Now,  the  management  and  direction  of 
the  tremendous  business  enterprises  owned  by  corpora- 
tions places  far-reaching  powers  in  the  hands  of  a  small 
number  of  directors  or  of  the  president  or  manager  of 
the  institution.  In  the  presence  of  such  immense 
power,  the  individual  worker  is  helpless.  Only  by  mass 
action  can  he  meet  his  employer  upon  anything  ap- 
proaching a  plane  of  equality.  Therefore,  the  labor 
union  is  legitimate  and,  in  fact,  necessary. 

Here  then  is  a  conflict  of  interest.  The  manager  of 
the  plant,  representing  the  board  of  directors,  and  in- 
directly hundreds  and  perhaps  thousands  of  stockhold- 
ers, has  constantly  in  mind,  and  properly  so,  the  one 
idea  of  so  conducting  the  business  as  to  pay  expenses, 
provide  for  maintenance  and  expansion,  and  earn  divi- 
dends for  the  stockholders.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
president  or  other  managing  officer  of  the  unionized 
employees  of  the  plant  has  an  interest  to  serve.  As 
the  official  representative  of  the  workers  he  must  keep 
constantly  in  mind  the  quality  of  the  wage,  the  length 
of  the  working  day,  and  the  betterment  of  w'orking 
conditions.  This  conflict  of  interest  involves  large 
sums  of  money  to  the  immediate  parties ;  it  involves. 


24  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

SO  far  as  labor  is  concerned,  priceless  interests  in  the 
way  of  health  and  living  and  working  conditions;  but 
above  and  beyond  all  is  the  interest  of  the  general  pub- 
lic, which  depends  upon  the  business  corporation  and 
the  labor  union  for  the  necessaries  of  life,  which  must 
be  produced  by  their  joint  efforts. 

THE  TERROR  OF  UNEMPLOYMENT 

A  professional  man  in  the  prime  of  middle  life  was 
taken  sick.  He  had  high  fever.  He  became  delirious. 
He  was  living  in  his  own  home  which  was  elegant  and 
commodious.  He  was  surrounded  by  every  comfort 
and  convenience  of  modern  civilization.  Yet  in  his 
delirium  he  was  constantly  asking  persons  at  his  bed- 
side for  work.  "Can't  you  give  me  a  job?"  he  would 
say.  His  distress  was  pitiful  to  see.  For  hours  at  a 
time  he  was  harassed  with  this  illusion  caused  by  the 
fever.  After  his  recovery,  when  he  was  told  of  the  cir- 
cumstance, he  explained  that  in  his  youth  there  had 
been  a  time  when  he  was  unemployed.  His  meager 
savings  were  soon  spent  for  food.  He  was  unable  to 
find  employment.  For  two  weeks  he  had  almost 
starved  himself  in  his  effort  to  conserve  the  little  bal- 
ance of  his  funds.  At  last,  penniless,  for  three  days 
he  walked  in  search  of  work,  too  proud  to  beg  and 
wholly  without  food.  He  had  a  ringing  in  his  ears, 
an  unsteadiness  of  vision,  a  throbbing  of  the  head,  the 
depression  of  spirit  which  constantly  suggested  self- 
destruction  such  as  described  by  Victor  Hugo  in  Les 
Mherables.  He  said  that  many  times  during  the  twen- 
ty-five years  intervening,  in  his  sleep,  the  scenes  of 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  25 

that  experience  came  to  him  as  a  nightmare.  At  last 
the  dehrium  of  fever  caused  him  to  make  his  secret 
known  to  his  family  and  his  friends.  At  the  time  of 
this  fearful  experience  he  had  no  dependents.  What 
must  be  the  terror  of  unemployment  to  the  head  of  a 
family  when  he  realizes  that  his  wife  and  children  must 
suffer  with  him  ?  Is  it  any  wonder  that  the  honest  but 
jobless  man  should  curse  the  present  industrial  sys- 
tem? Does  government  owe  no  duty  to  the  man  who 
is  willing  to  work  but  has  no  opportunity?  What  is 
the  measure  of  the  state's  responsibility  to  the  helpless 
family  of  the  jobless  man? 

THE   investor's   INTEREST   AND   THE   WORKER's    WAGE 

Capital  invested  in  the  securities  of  public  utilities 
and  common  carriers  is  by  law  protected  in  its  right  to 
a  fair  return.  The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
and  the  various  state  commissions  are  by  statute  re- 
quired, in  the  fixing  of  rates  and  in  the  exercise  of  other 
regulatory  powers,  to  protect  the  investment  by  such 
rates  and  such  regulations  as  will  permit  earnings  suf- 
ficient to  provide  a  fair  return  upon  the  property  used 
and  useful  in  the  business.  The  general  laws  are  so 
framed  and  so  administered  that  the  property  of  the 
citizen  is  surrounded  with  the  greatest  protection  ever 
known  among  men, — the  protection  afforded  by  gov- 
ernment through  the  instrumentalities  of  law,  of  peace 
officers,  and  of  courts, — all  of  which  is  necessary  in 
the  protection  of  life,  liberty  and  property.  The  rights 
of  property,  as  stated  before,  are  so  closely  connected 
with  life,  liberty,   and  the  pursuit   of  happiness  that 


26  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

there  can  be  no  segregation  or  separation  of  any  kind. 
But  the  right  to  possess  and  enjoy  property  is  also  in- 
separably connected  with  the  right  to  acquire  it  in  any 
lawful  manner.  By  labor, — with  hand  or  brain, — men 
must  acquire  property.  "In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt 
thou  eat  bread."  (Gen.  3:19).  Therefore,  the  right 
to  labor  is  the  primary  right.  Labor  is  the  foundation 
upon  which  must  be  built  every  man's  private  fortune. 
As  a  property  right  alone  then  the  job  and  the  wage 
of  the  worker  should  be  protected  by  law.  This  protec- 
tion should  be  as  ample  as  is  possible  consistent  with 
economic  wisdom.  The  worker  himself  as  a  citizen  is 
entitled  to  such  protection.  The  state  does  not  protect 
a  return  upon  every  investment  of  capital.  A  foolish 
investment  falls  outside  the  protection  of  the  law.  The 
state  cannot  protect  the  wage  of  the  idler,  the  slacker, 
or  the  misfit  in  industry.  But  the  pretended  right  of 
the  employer  to  get  his  labor  upon  the  "labor  market" 
at  the  lowest  possible  wage,  to  take  advantage  of  the 
necessities  of  the  workers  at  the  time  of  a  glut  in  the 
"market"  caused  by  economic  depression,  if  a  right  at 
all,  is  subject  to  many  limitations.  The  worker's  con- 
tribution to  society  is  his  good  health,  his  strong  mus- 
cle, his  skill  and  fidelity.  His  contribution  is  as  valu- 
able as  the  capital  of  his  employer.  Having  made  such 
an  important  contribution  to  the  public,  his  job  and 
his  wage  should  be  protected  by  law.  Until  such  pro- 
tection is  given  the  wage  earner,  the  government  will 
not  have  fulfilled  its  obligation  in  this  regard.  The  old 
adage,  "The  world  owes  every  man  a  living,"  is  bad 
morally  as  well  as  economically ;  but  ciznlisation  does 
owe  to  every  man  a  fair  opportunity  to  earn  a  living. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  2'J 

But  the  interest  of  the  worker  and  of  the  investor  in 
the  essential  industries  is  inseparably  connected  with 
the  interest  of  the  general  public.  Upon  the  continu- 
ous and  efficient  operation  of  these  industries,  the  pub- 
lic must  depend  for  the  necessaries  and  comforts  of  life. 
It  is,  therefore,  a  matter  of  public  interest  that  skilled 
and  faithful  workers  and  ample  capital  should  be  al- 
ways available  in  these  industries.  In  order  to  insure 
the  proper  operation  of  such  industries,  a  fair  return 
should  be  allowed  to  capital  and  a  fair  wage  must  be 
paid  and  healthful  and  moral  surroundings  provided 
for  labor.  Otherwise  workers  of  the  highest  skill  and 
fidelity  will  leave  the  employment  of  such  institutions 
and  seek  a  better  wage  and  better  conditions  offered 
by  enterprises  of  a  private  nature  not  essential  to  the 
public  welfare  and  capital  likewise  will  seek  other  fields 
for  investment.  Wholly  aside,  then,  from  the  purely 
altruistic  considerations  which  are  always  so  impor- 
tant in  wage  matters,  the  protection  of  the  public  re- 
quires a  fair  wage  and  healthful  and  moral  surround- 
ings in  the  essential  industries. 

There  is  another  public  interest  more  vital  perhaps 
and  yet  an  interest  which  seems  to  be  generally  over- 
looked. An  inadequate  wage,  long  hours  of  labor,  and 
unsanitary  working  conditions,  if  long  continued, 
•work  irreparable  injury  to  the  health,  physique  and 
morale  of  the  workers  and  their  families.  This  causes 
rapid  deterioration  of  the  race  and  a  corresponding 
economic  loss  which  the  nation  at  large  must  suffer. 
The  moral  and  physical  decay  of  the  working  popula- 
tion, which  must  result  from  such  evils,  is  inseparably 
connected  with  the  decay  of  the  nation  as  a  whole.     In 


28  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

a  democratic  government  such  as  ours,  however,  the 
chief  injury  to  the  nation  is  found  in  the  decay  of 
the  morale  and  the  patriotism  of  that  portion  of  the 
population  directly  affected  by  such  adverse  conditions. 
No  democratic  government  can  long  exist  which  does 
not  protect  the  workers  against  these  eviJs.  The  inter- 
est and  principal  of  the  investor,  the  wage  and  the  job 
of  the  worker, — all  property  rights, — are  entitled  to 
the  equal  protection  of  the  law. 

THE  CITIZEN  OF  THE  FUTURE 

Self-preservation  is  said  to  be  the  "first  law  of  na- 
ture." Self-perpetuation  should  be  the  first  rule  of 
government.  Democratic  government  depends  in  the 
final  test  wholly  upon  the  uprightness  and  intelligence 
of  its  citizens.  The  government  of  the  United  States, 
and  of  the  various  states,  the  president,  Congress,  the 
United  States  courts,  the  various  departments,  the  gov- 
ernors of  the  states,  the  legislatures,  the  state  courts, — 
all  the  instrumentalities  of  government  exist  and  are 
maintained  for  the  one  prime  purpose  of  making  it  pos- 
sible that  every  child  born  within  the  boundaries  of  the 
Republic  shall  be  reared  under  healthful  and  moral 
surroundings,  schooled  under  the  direction  of  the  state, 
and  become  a  patriotic,  moral  and  upright  citizen.  If 
there  be  within  the  confines  of  this  country  one  child, 
who  by  reason  of  the  poverty  or  unemployment  of  its 
natural  protector, — its  parent, — must  go  to  bed  hungry 
at  night,  must  be  nurtured  inadequately  in  an  immoral 
or  unsanitary  home,  must  have  its  body  and  soul 
stunted  or  warped  by  reason  of  such  adverse  condi- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  29 

tions,  to  that  extent  at  least  organized  government, 
organized  religion,  organized  philanthropy,  organized 
business,  organized  labor, — all  have  miserably  failed. 

THE  TRIUMPH  OF  DEMOCRACY 

The  rule  of  the  majority, — 

The  willing  submission  of  the  minority  to  that 
rule, — 

The  largest  liberty  of  the  individual  consistent  witli 
the  general  welfare, — 

Equality  of  opportunity, — 

These  are  the  four  cornerstones  of  democracy's 
foundation. 

If  we  believe  in  individual  liberty  and  equality  of  op- 
portunity, if  we  believe  in  the  principles  so  boldly  an- 
nounced in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  if  we 
believe  in  making  the  world  safe  for  democracy,  if  we 
believe  in  making  democracy  triumphant  in  the  United 
States  of  America, — 'we  must  fight!  The  struggle  will 
not  be  upon  the  battlefield,  or  upon  the  sea,  or  under 
the  sea,  or  in  the  air,  but  at  the  ballot  box,  in  the  halls 
of  legislation,  in  the  forum  of  public  opinion.  A  gov- 
ernment of  law,  not  a  government  of  men  must  be  our 
aim.  Private  iud'nndnals  or  organhations  must  not 
exercise  the  powers  zvhich  belong  "only  to  government." 
Justice  Brewer,  formerly  a  member  of  the  Kansas  Bar, 
formerly  a  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Kansas, 
late  a  justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  in  re  Debs  (158  U.  S.  564,  39  Law  Ed.  1092) 
clearly  states  one  of  the  principles  which  must  be  ap- 
plied to  the  solution  of  the  problems  of  the  day  if 


30  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

democracy  is  to  survive.  The  words  of  the  justice 
should  go  down  in  history  with  the  definition  of  democ- 
racy by  Abraham  Lincoln  at  Gett^^sburg. 


THE  NEED  OF  LEGISLATION 

In  the  Debs  case  ( 158  U.  S.  564)  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  upheld  the  power  of  the  courts 
on  application  of  the  public  to  enjoin  persons  from 
interfering  with  interstate  commerce  by  the  method 
of  the  strike,  intimidation  and  violence.  There  have 
been  many  other  instances  in  which  courts  of  general 
jurisdiction  have  enjoined  laboring  men  and  labor  lead- 
ers from  similar  interference  with  business  in  which 
the  public  is  interested.  There  have  also  been  numer- 
ous instances  in  which  courts  have  prevented  capital- 
ists from  unlawful  acts  in  regard  to  the  conduct  of 
similar  business.  The  injunction  method  has  met  with 
violent  opposition  from  labor  leaders.  This  opposition 
has  found  considerable  support  with  the  general  pub- 
lic. Some  of  the  states  have  laws  limiting  the  power  of 
courts  to  grant  injunctions  against  labor.  The  Federal 
Government  in  the  Clayton  Act  did  the  same  thing. 
The  legislature  of  the  state  of  Kansas  passed  such  a 
law.  Now,  the  Debs  case  was  decided  twenty-five 
years  ago.  The  right  to  use  the  injunction  to  prevent 
interference  by  strike  with  businesses  or  industries 
which  affect  the  public  was  very  clearly  recognized, 
and  yet  no  general  good  result  was  obtained  by  the 
injunction  method. 

There  has  been  no  law,  no  tribunal  and  no  legal  pro- 
cedure by  which  the  controversy  between  capital  and 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  3I 

labor  could  be  adjudicated.  Employing  capital  has  had 
the  benefit  of  such  tribunals  and  such  laws  for  its  pro- 
tection. In  case  of  public  utilities  and  common  carriers, 
at  least,  if  the  rates  were  too  low  or  the  burdens  too 
heavy,  if  the  rules  and  practices  required  by  the  public 
were  unreasonable,  the  courts,  the  interstate  commerce 
commission,  and  the  state  public  utilities  and  public 
service  commissions  were  open  to  capital  and  had 
power  and  authority  to  grant  relief.  Employers  in 
other  lines  could,  at  least,  cease  operations  when  the 
business  became  unprofitable.  They  could,  and  no 
doubt  in  many  cases  did,  by  combination  by  means  of 
their  various  organizations  regulate  the  price  them- 
selves to  suit  the  conditions  surrounding  production 
and  marketing.  On  the  other  hand,  labor  was  left 
without  any  recourse  by  legal  procedure.  There  was 
no  industrial  law  nor  industrial  code  which  enabled 
labor  to  apply  for  relief  upon  the  ground  that  the  wage 
was  too  low  or  the  working  conditions  bad.  If  the 
plant  shut  down,  throwing  workmen  out  of  employ- 
ment, there  was  no  tribunal  into  which  the  unem- 
ployed workman  might  go  and  ask  for  a  redress  of 
his  grievances.  If,  in  the  course  of  operation,  em- 
ploying capital  concluded  as  a  means  of  adding  to  its 
dividends  to  reduce  the  wage,  it  had  the  power  to  do  so. 
If  it  decided  to  lengthen  the  day  for  the  same  purpose, 
it  could  do  so  and  there  was  no  legal  way  by  which 
labor  could  be  heard.  The  strike  or  the  boycott  was 
the  only  means  left  to  labor  by  which  it  might  redress 
its  grievances. 

Some  feeble  attempts  to  establish  justice  by  legisla- 
tion have  been  made.     In  some  states  the  employment 


32  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

of  young  children  in  certain  industries  has  been  pro- 
hibited. We  have  some  laws  fixing  the  hours  of  labor 
for  women  and  children  and  in  some  states  a  minimum 
wage  for  women.  We  have  provided  for  the  inspec- 
tion of  mines  and  factories  and  have  sanitary  and  safe- 
ty precautions.  We  have  our  national  safety  appliance 
act  which  has  been  copied  by  the  states  to  some  extent. 
We  have  workmen's  compensation  acts  by  which  we 
seek  to  relieve  the  state  of  the  burden  of  caring  for  the 
dependent  or  injured  workmen  during  their  incapacity 
to  work,  and  for  at  least  temporary  care  of  widows  and 
orphans  of  such  as.  may  be  killed  in  the  course  of  em- 
ployment. Employing  capital  has  resisted  the  enact- 
ment of  each  of  these  salutary  laws.  In  many  instances 
employing  capital  has  refused  to  obey  such  laws  until 
compelled  to  do  so  by  the  courts.  The  laws  themselves 
are  very  difficult  of  enforcement  and  in  many  instances 
the  laborers  afifected  are  timid  in  seeking  to  obtain  the 
benefits  of  such  laws  fearing  discharge  or  other  dis- 
crimination against  them.  Notwithstanding  all  these 
provisions  of  the  law,  the  year  1919  witnessed  the 
greatest  number  of  strikes  and  the  greatest  loss  from 
strikes  ever  known  in  America.  Many  of  these  strikes 
were  accompanied  by  violations  of  the  statutes,  such  as 
disturbances  of  the  peace,  assaults  upon  individuals, 
and  the  destruction  of  property.  The  courts  of  gen- 
eral jurisdiction  and  the  laws  of  the  land  failed  to  pre- 
vent these  evils.  The  method  of  injunction  in  some 
instances,  perhaps,  minimized  the  public  suffering 
which  might  have  resulted,  but  that  is  the  best  that 
can  be  said  for  that  method  of  procedure  in  industrial 
controversies.     Public  sentiment,  even  at  the  present 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  33 

time,  after  all  the  suffering  which  has  resulted  in  recent 
years  from  industrial  Avarfare,  would  not  approve  of 
the  use  of  the  injunction  as  a  mere  bludgeon  against 
labor  engaged  in  the  struggle  to  better  its  condition. 
For  that  reason,  among  other  numerous  reasons,  some 
adequate  remedy  should  be  offered  to  labor  by  which 
it  may  secure  a  fair  measure  of  justice.  Some  new 
legislation  seems  necessary.  Some  tribunal  should  be 
established,  impartial  in  its  nature,  to  which  labor  may 
go  with  its  grievances.  An  industrial  code  should  be 
enacted  which  would  provide  a  remedy  for  the  evils  of 
unemployment,  underpay,  unreasonable  working  hours, 
and  unsanitary  conditions.  Some  means  must  be  pro- 
vided by  which  it  will  be  possible  to  remove  the  cause 
of  industrial  unrest  and  make  the  strike  and  the  boy- 
cott unnecessary.  Trial  of  industrial  disputes  by  gauge 
of  battle  should  be  prohibited  and  in  place  thereof 
should  be  established  a  safe,  sane  and  civilized  remedy 
for  industrial  wrongs.  The  industrial  controversy  is 
subject  to  adjudication.  The  tribunal  by  which  ad- 
judication may  be  made  must  be  impartial.  Access  to 
that  tribunal  must  be  free.  The  adjudication  must  be 
made  primarily  for  the  protection  of  the  public  and  the 
public  should  pay  the  bills.  The  laboring  man  should 
not  be  required  to  incur  heavy  expenses  in  order  to 
secure  a  fair  and  impartial  settlement  of  his  contro- 
versy with  his  employer.  If  ive  prohibit  the  strike  and 
the  boycott,  we  must  substitute  therefor  the  orderly 
processes  of  the  lazv.  By  law  we  must  protect  the 
wage  of  the  worker  equally  with  the  interest  of  the  in- 
vestor,— the  workers'  job  and  the  employer's  invest- 
ment must  enjoy  the  equal  protection  of  the  law. 


34  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 


THE  COURTS 

It  happened  on  a  passenger  train  running  at  full 
speed  over  the  prairies  of  Kansas.  The  conductor  had 
finished  his  work  and  sat  down  to  rest  beside  a  pas- 
senger who  was  an  old  acquaintance.  *T  see,"  said  the 
conductor,  "that  they  are  talking  of  passing  a  law 
creating  a  court  to  prevent  strikes  and  settle  labor  dis- 
putes." 

"Yes,"  said  his  companion.  "What  do  you  think 
about  it?" 

"Oh,  I  don't  think  much  of  it.  The  trouble  is  labor 
don't  have  no  confidence  in  courts." 

"Well,"  said  his  friend,  "what  do  you  yourself 
think  about  it,  Jim?" 

"I  am  a  good  deal  like  the  rest  of  them ;  I  don't  have 
much  confidence  in  courts  either." 

"Well,  now,  Jim,"  said  his  companion,  "I  have 
known  you  for  twenty-five  years;  you  were  born  in 
Kansas  and  your  parents  came  from  Ohio,  and  I  hap- 
pen to  know  that  you  are  a  good  citizen.  Now,  let  me 
ask  you  a  few  questions.  You  believe  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  don't  you?" 

"Sure,"  said  Jim. 

"You  believe  that  the  government  of  the  United 
States  is  the  best  government  in  the  world,  don't  you?" 

"You  bet  I  do.  I  stand  up  for  the  Stars  and 
Stripes." 

"Well,  you  also  believe  in  the  government  of  the 
state  of  Kansas,  don't  you?" 

"Yes,  sir;  I  put  Kansas  above  any  of  them." 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  35 

"Well,  now,  you  know  of  course,  that  the  govern- 
ment under  which  we  live  is  divided  by  constitutional 
provision  into  three  departments, — the  executive,  the 
legislative,  and  the  judicial.  The  executive  is  composed 
of  the  president  of  the  United  States,  the  cabinet  heads, 
etc.,  the  governors  of  the  various  states  and  the  heads 
of  state  departments ;  the  legislative  is  composed  of  the 
congress  of  the  United  States  and  the  state  legislatures ; 
and  the  judicial  is  composed  of  the  Supreme  Court  and 
the  inferior  courts  of  the  United  States,  and  the  Su- 
preme Court  and  inferior  courts  of  the  various  states." 

"Yes,  I  understand  all  that ;  remember  when  we  read 
that  in  our  history  books  at  school." 

"Well,  all  right,  then.  Now,  let's  take  the  three  de- 
partments and  see  where  we  stand.  We  haven't  always 
been  entirely  satisfied  with  the  occupants  of  the  White 
House,  have  we?" 

"No,  we  have  had  some  bum  deals  from  the  White 
House." 

"And  here  in  Kansas  we,  at  times,  have  been  dis- 
pleased with  the  governors  we  have  had?" 

"Yes,  I  remember  three  or  four  since  I  have  been  old 
enough  to  notice  such  things  that  didn't  amount  to 
much  according  to  my  way  of  thinking." 

"Well,  how  about  the  legislative  branch,  the  Con- 
gress of  the  United  States  and  the  legislatures  of  the 
various  states?" 

"Oh,  sometimes  they  are  pretty  good ;  but  there  have 
been  times  when  I  would  have  been  willing  to  see  them 
all  abolished,  they  passed  such  bum  laws.  They  passed 
some  good  ones  at  times.  We  have  some  pretty  good 
laws  in  this  country." 


36  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

"Well,  now,  let's  take  the  judicial  branch  of  the 
government ;  have  you  ever  had  a  lawsuit  ?" 

"No,  I  never  had  a  lawsuit  and  never  was  a  wit- 
ness in  court,  but  once,  and  never  did  serve  on  a  jury." 

"Well,  what  do  you  think  about  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  state  of  Kansas?" 

"Oh,  all  right,  as  far  as  I  know;  don't  know  any- 
thing about  it." 

"Well,  what  do  you  think  about  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  "States?" 

"Well,  I  think  that  was  a  mighty  good  decision  in 
the  railroad  men's  case,  they  called  it  the  Adamson  Law 
case.     I  like  that." 

"Well,  what  have  you  got  against  the  courts?" 

"Oh,  generally,  I  think  they  are  against  labor." 

"Don't  the  courts  interpret  and  assist  in  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  laws  that  are  made  by  the  legislature  ?" 

"Yes,  I  reckon  that's  right." 

"Now,  Jim,  taking  it  all  in  all,  would  you  say  that 
the  executive  branch  of  the  government  is  superior  to 
the  judicial  branch?" 

"No,  I  guess  not;  no,  I  don't  think  so." 

"Would  you  say  that  the  legislative  branch, — con- 
gress and  the  state  legislatures, — is  superior  in  any 
way,  or  more  just  and  reasonable,  or  has  shown 
greater  wisdom  than  the  judicial  branch  of  the  gov- 
ernment?" 

"No,  couldn't  say  that  either." 

"Now,  look  here,  Jim,  don't  you  see  that  if  you  are 
for  the  government  of  the  United  States,  if  you  are  in 
favor  of  the  government  of  the  state  of  Kansas  at  all, 
you've  got  to  say  that  you  are  in  favor  of  the  courts, 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  3/ 

that  they  are  proper  and  legitimate,  a  part  of  the  gov- 
ernment, and  we  couldn't  have  the  government  with- 
out them?" 

"Yes,  sir,  Bill,  I  will  have  to  admit  it.  I  think  the  ju- 
dicial branch  of  this  government  stands  higher  for  fair- 
ness and  justice  and  wisdom  than  either  one  of  the  other 
two.     I  am  not  going  to  cuss  the  courts  any  more."' 

"Well,  that's  good,  Jim,  I  am  glad  you  feel  that  way. 
Now,  I  want  to  tell  you  something.  The  laboring  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States,  at  least  organized  labor  to 
some  extent  has  been  led  astray  and  had  its  loyalty 
somewhat  depreciated  by  the  radical  leadership  which 
has  forced  itself  upon  organized  labor  within  the  last 
twenty  years.  A  good  many  of  these  leaders,  Jim, 
who  are  "cussing  the  courts"  and  trying  to  stir  up 
strife  between  working  people  and  employers,  don't 
believe  in  a  democratic  form  of  government  at  all. 
They  are  red-card  socialists,  and  bolshevists,  a  great 
many  of  them  are  foreigners  and  a  dangerous  element, 
and  loyal  American  laboring  men  ought  to  steer  clear 
of  them." 

"Well,  Bill,  you  know  I  am  a  union  man  but  you 
know  good  and  well  that  I'm  no  dynamiter.  I  believe 
in  law  and  law  enforcement." 

It  is  the  glory  of  Anglo-Saxon  jurisprudence, — first 
that  it  affords  a  remedy  for  every  justiciable  wrong; 
and,  second,  that  through  its  instrumentalities  jus- 
tice is  administered  impartially  in  accordance  with  es- 
tablished rules,  not  by  the  caprice  of  the  judge.  Re- 
spect for  courts  is  thoroughly  ingrained  in  the  nature 
of  all  English  speaking  peoples.     No  invidious  com- 


4 


38  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

parison  should  be  made  as  among  the  three  departments 
of  government, — executive,  legislative,  and  judicial. 
Each  is  an  integral  part  of  one  harmonious  whole. 
Each  is  necessary.  Each  has  its  important  functions 
to  perform.  No  man  who  believes  in  our  form  of 
government  would  contend  that  any  one  of  the  three 
could  be  dispensed  with.  But  especially  in  America, 
with  our  written  constitutions,  containing  as  they  do 
the  settled  conviction  of  the  people,  the  courts  must 
perform,  in  many  respects,  the  most  important  func- 
tion of  government. 

The  courts  interpret  the  laws  as  they  are  enacted  by 
the  legislative  assemblies,  and  determine  whether  such 
laws  are  in  harmony  with  the  constitution,  which  is  the 
highest  law.  Some  there  are  who  deride  the  power  of 
the  courts  to  declare  unconstitutional  any  legislative 
act.  Such  men  surely  cannot  be  thoroughly  conversant 
with  the  rules  and  practices  of  legislatures,  with  the 
character  and  caliber  of  legislators,  with  the  considera- 
tions that  sometimes  prompt  legislative  action,  with  the 
political  and  economic  influences  which  often  impel  leg- 
islative majorities.  Men  who  are  acquainted  with  our 
legislative  history  will  hesitate  before  depriving  the 
courts  of  this  authority.  The  acts  of  the  executive 
branch  of  the  government  must  be  subject  to  review 
by  the  courts  to  bring  such  acts  in  harmony  with  the 
duties  and  functions  prescribed  for  the  various  offi- 
cials by  the  constitution  and  the  laws.  There  can  be 
no  substitute  for  the  courts.  No  government  such  as 
ours  can  function  without  them.  In  the  administration 
of  justice  between  and  among  citizens,  the  courts  per- 
form a  duty  which  is  of  the  utmost  importance.    With 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  39 

every  advance  in  civilization  comes  greater  complexity 
in  the  relations  among  men.  It  was  said  by  an  ancient 
law  'writer  that  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  any  con- 
troversy which  might  arise  among  men  but  that  a 
method  of  adjudication  could  be  found  in  the  provi- 
sions of  the  common  law.  For  many  generations  the 
courts  in  all  the  English  speaking  countries  of  the 
world  have  performed  their  functions  to  the  general 
satisfaction  of  the  people.  There  is  greater  respect  for 
the  courts  today  perhaps  than  there  was  one  hundred 
years  ago.  It  is  a  fact  generally  recognized  that  the 
courts  are  more  independent  of  outside  influence  than 
either  of  the  other  branches  of  government.  This  inde- 
pendence of  the  judiciary  is  its  chief  virtue,  and  it  is 
the  only  guarantee  of  every  man's  liberty.  Sir  Mat- 
thew Hale,  the  English  judge,  two  hundred  and  sixty 
years  ago,  in  the  time  of  Charles  II,  stating  that  in 
matters  affecting  the  public  interest  the  king  himself 
stands  before  the  law  the  equal  only  of  his  humblest 
subject;  Chief  Justice  Waite  in  1877  declaring  the 
same  principle  as  it  adversely  affected  tremendous  in- 
vestments of  money  and  great  commercial  interests; 
Justice  Brewer  in  1895  declaring  the  authority  of  the 
law  as  against  powerful  combinations  of  men  who  were 
"attempting  to  exercise  powers  which  belong  only  to 
government;"  and  Chief  Justice  White  in  his  strong 
statement  in  191 6,  upholding  the  right  of  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  to  protect  the  public  interest 
in  case  of  emergency, — all  are  shining  examples  of  the 
independence  of  the  judiciary  and  constant  reminders 
that  the  liberties  of  the  people  are  safe  in  the  hands 
of  the  courts. 


40  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

THE  PSYCHOLOGY  OF  THE  PRESENT  LABOR   LEADERSHIP 

Beyond  doubt,  the  average  working  man  is  as  good 
a  citizen  as  the  average  business  man.  No  general  con- 
demnation of  any  particular  class  or  group  of  citizens 
is  justifiable.  There  is  something  strange,  however,  in 
the  attitude  toward  government  of  the  present  labor 
leadership.  Among  labor  leaders  from  the  highest  to 
the  lowest,  there  seems  to  be  a  hostility  toward  gov- 
ernment, toward  the  courts,  toward  any  law  which  at- 
tempts to  regulate  or  limit  the  power  of  the  labor  offi- 
cials. Recently  it  was  reported  that  one  of  the  mighti- 
est of  the  mighty  leaders  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor  declared  to  a  committee  of  Congress  that 
any  Federal  law  placing  limitations  on  the  "right  to 
strike"  would  not  be  obeyed  by  labor.  In  Kansas  one 
of  the  leaders  of  an  organized  minority  of  the  people 
of  this  state  boldly  but  vocally  defies  the  law  and  the 
courts,  and  proclaims  his  right  as  a  representative  of 
working  men  to  violate  the  law  if  necessary  to  insure 
what  he  calls  "justice  to  labor."  He  arrogates  to  him- 
self the  authority  to  adjudge  all  such  matters.  Those 
men  and  men  of  their  kind  seem  to  be  imbued  with 
the  idea  that  organized  labor  although  in  the  United 
States  of  America  is  not  of  the  United  States  of 
America;  that  organized  labor  is  separate  and  apart 
from  the  general  citizenship;  that  it  is  not  required  to 
obey  the  laws  which  are  enforceable  against  other  peo- 
ple but  that  it  has  the  power  and  the  right  to  choose 
which  laws  it  will  obey  and  which  it  will  not ;  that  it 
may  invoke  the  protection  of  the  laws  when  it  sees  fit 
and  violate  them  when  its  interest  may  so  be  served. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  4I 

Under  such  leadership  nothing  but  disaster  can  result 
to  organized  labor.  Not  all  of  the  present  leaders  are 
of  such  type.  The  labor  leader  of  the  future  must  be 
a  man  of  a  very  different  type.  He  must  be  a  law- 
abiding  citizen  from  choice  and  not  from  compufsion. 
He  must  be  diplomatic.  He  must  rely  upon  the  rights 
of  labor,  not  upon  its  might  in  mass  action.  He  must 
meet  with  the  superintendent  of  the  plant  on  equal 
terms.  He  must  represent  his  co-workers  as  an  am- 
bassador interested  only  in  the  results  to  be  attained  in 
his  efforts  to  secure  a  fair  wage  and  fair  working  con- 
ditions for  his  fellows.  Democracy  will  survive.  If 
the  labor  union  is  to  continue,  the  attitude  of  organized 
labor  toward  law  and  government  as  represented  by 
many  of  its  present  leaders  must  change.  Organized 
capital  and  organized  labor  must  be  subservient  to  law. 

NOT  HASTY  LEGISLATION 

This  country  has  suffered  much  in  the  past  by  rea- 
son of  what  is  called  "hasty  legislation."  We  have  a 
habit  of  "waiting  until  the  horse  is  stolen  before  lock- 
ing the  stable  door,"  or  to  make  the  old  adage  more 
modern,  "waiting  until  after  the  car  is  taken  before 
closing  the  garage."  The  impression  seems  to  be  prev- 
alent that  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act  is  an  example  of 
such  hasty  legislation.     That  impression  is  incorrect. 

For  many  years  past,  men  have  been  saying  that 
there  should  be  some  legal  means  of  controlling  strikes, 
lockouts,  and  the  boycott.  Men  prominent  in  public 
affairs  have  from  time  to  time  said  that  there  ought  to 
be  some  way  of  adjusting  these  industrial  disputes 
under  the  supervision  of  the  government.     Some  men 


42  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

have  even  asserted  that  there  should  be  courts  estab- 
Hshed  into  which  such  controversies  could  be  taken  for 
settlement.  No  doubt  thousands  of  people  have  had 
such  ideas.  Until  the  enactment  of  the  Kansas  Indus- 
trial Law,  no  government  in  the  world  had  undertaken 
to  adjudicate  industrial  controversies.  Australia,  New 
Zealand,  the  United  Kingdom,  Massachusetts,  and  per- 
haps other  states  had  enacted  various  labor  laws  pro- 
viding for  the  adjustment  of  industrial  controversies, 
but  they  were  all  based  upon  the  principle  of  arbitra- 
tion, compulsory  or  voluntary.  The  United  States 
government,  during  the  Great  War,  provided  means 
by  which  arbitration  was  encouraged.  No  doubt  these 
arbitration  tribunals  have  been  of  considerable  value  to 
the  countries  in  which  they  have  been  established,  but 
it  cannot  be  denied  that  arbitration  has  failed  to  meet 
the  requirements  of  the  day.  Each  party  to  the  dispute 
is  represented  by  arbiters  of  its  choice  and  thus  the 
matter  starts  out  with  a  biased  tribunal.  The  arbiter 
chosen  by  labor  is  always  a  labor  leader  or  some  other 
person  thoroughly  committed  to  labor's  views.  The  ar- 
biter chosen  by  capital,  likewise,  is  thoroughly  com- 
mitted to  the  capitalistic  view.  The  umpire  who  must 
be  chosen  is  really  the  sole  authority.  Each  group  rep- 
resentative is,  in  fact,  an  advocate.  Each  group  de- 
mands "everything  in  sight."  The  best  that  can  be 
hoped  for  in  such  a  situation  is  a  "trade"  or  a  compro- 
mise. In  a  government  of  law  no  man  should  be 
compelled  to  accept  the  compromise  of  his  rights  by  a 
biased  tribunal.  He  is  entitled  to  an  adjudication  by 
an  impartial  tribunal. 

Henry  Suzzalo,  Ph.  D.,  president  of  the  University 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  43 

of  the  State  of  Washington,  who  served  the  govern- 
ment so  efficiently  during  the  Great  War  as  an  arbiter 
in  labor  controversies,  says  that  the  position  of  the 
"neutral  leader"  in  the  arbitration  of  labor  contro- 
versies is  the  "hardest  position  in  the  world  to  occupy." 
He  says :  "I  have  sat  as  a  judge  on  an  arbitration 
board  and  I  want  to  say  that  I  don't  believe  there  are 
enough  people  yet  developed  in  the  United  States  to 
make  good  neutral  members  of  arbitration  boards.  .  .  . 
I  don't  believe  that  you  can  get  a  compulsory  arbitra- 
tion board  to  work  successfully  until  you  develop  a 
body  of  principles  for  the  settlement  of  economic  dis- 
putes and  until  you  develop  a  body  of  liberal  citizens 
who  can  be  impartial  and  who  may  be  just  as  judges." 
If  a  man  of  President  Suzzalo's  high  character,  ripe 
scholarship,  and  successful  experience  finds  it  so  diffi- 
cult, how  can  it  be  expected  that  arbitration  can  be 
successful  in  times  of  great  economic  and  industrial 
disturbances  ? 

The  bill  which  became  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act 
was  written  after  a  veiy  careful  study  of  the  New 
Zealand,  Australian,  Canadian,  British  and  Massachu- 
setts arbitration  laws  and  after  a  careful  study  of  the 
results  obtained  through  the  medium  of  such  laws. 
The  Kansas  Act  is  a  complete  departure  from  all  the 
other  acts  mentioned.  While  the  Kansas  law  favors, 
and  the  Kansas  Industrial  Court  has  encouraged,  vol- 
untary arbitration  and  conciliation  within  the  industry, 
when  these  fail  and  industrial  warfare  is  imminent, 
then  the  Kansas  law  steps  in  and  provides  for  adjudi- 
cation. The  Kansas  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  is 
emphatically  not  an  arbitration  tribunal  and  the  entire 


44  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

act  is  based  upon  the  principle  of  adjudication, — not 
arbitration.  We,  in  Kansas,  for  the  first  time  have 
proposed  the  le^al  principles  upon  which  industrial  dis- 
putes may  be  adjudicated  and  have  enacted  a  law  which 
creates  the  kind  of  tribunal  and  establishes  a  compre- 
hensive code  of  procedure  by  which  such  adjudication 
may  be  had.  In  other  words, — we,  in  Kansas,  have 
taken  the  abstract  propositions  which  have  been  made 
and  the  general  conversations  which  have  occurred 
through  years  upon  this  important  subject,  and  have 
reduced  the  whole  matter  to  a  concrete  legal  enactment 
based  upon  what  we  regard  as  the  proper  legal  prin- 
ciples and  have  provided  the  court  and  the  code  of 
procedure  necessary  to  accomplish  the  result  desired. 
In  this  respect  Kansas  is  entitled  to  commendation  or 
condemnation,  depending  upon  the  mental  attitude  of 
the  party  discussing  the  subject. 

The  present  law  has  been  in  contemplation  and  has 
been  given  much  study  running  over  a  period  of  at 
least  ten  years.  Seven  years  before  its  enactment  by 
the  Kansas  legislature  the  fundamental  legal  principles 
of  the  present  act  were  stated  in  a  public  address  to  a 
Kansas  civic  body.  In  the  month  of  October,  19 19, 
almost  every  detail  of  the  present  law  was  concretely 
stated  in  a  public  discourse  at  a  Rotary  Club  luncheon. 
The  month  following  (November,  19 19)  the  nation- 
wide coal  strike  occurred.  The  cessation  of  coal  min- 
ing extended  to  the  mines  of  Kansas.  Being  a  prairie 
state,  Kansas  suffered  not  only  in  her  cities  but  upon 
her  farms.  This  strike  was  made  the  occasion  for  the 
calling  of  a  special  session  of  the  legislature.  The 
strike,  then,  was  the  occasion  but  it  was  not  the  cause 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  45 

of  the  preparation  and  enactment  of  the  law  as  it  now 
stands.  The  bill  was  drafted  with  painstaking  care  by 
the  use  of  the  Rotary  speech  above  mentioned  as  an 
outline.  After  the  preparation  of  the  first  draft  of  the 
bill,  it  was  presented  for  criticism  and  suggestion  to 
a  number  of  prominent  lawyers  of  our  state.  The 
critics  were  so  divided  in  their  criticism  that  little 
change  was  occasioned  thereby.  The  bill  practically 
as  originally  drafted  was  placed  in  the  hands  of  mem- 
bers of  the  two  Houses  of  the  legislature  and  was  intro- 
duced simultaneously  as  bill  No.  i  in  each  House. 

The  Kansas  legislature  of  1919  deserves  especial 
mention.  It  was  a  wartime  legislature.  Its  member- 
ship was  elected  before  the  Armistice.  It  was  com- 
posed of  strong  men.  Most  of  them,  in  the  nature  of 
the  case,  were  men  in  middle  life  as  the  young  fellows 
were  in  the  service  of  the  government.  Some  of  the 
strongest  lawyers,  bankers,  business  men,  some  of  the 
most  substantial  farmers  in  the  state  were  members  of 
that  legislature.  Five  members  were  veterans  of  the 
Civil  War.  The  special  session  opened  on  January  5, 
1920.  There  was  a  spirit  of  determination  manifest, 
but  there  was  also  a  spirit  of  altruism.  Party  "dicker- 
ing" was  unknown.  Factionalism  did  not  appear. 
There  was  a  spirit  of  cooperation  which  was  little  less 
than  marvelous.  The  House  of  Representatives  went 
into  committee  of  the  whole,  invited  in  the  Senate  and 
held  public  discussions  for  a  period  of  a  week  or  more, 
inviting  in  big  representatives  of  labor  to  discuss  the 
bill.  Frank  P.  Walsh,  attorney  for  the  Railroad 
Brotherhoods,  a  man  of  international  reputation,  who 
had  been  a  member  of  the  War  Labor  Board  of  the 


46  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

government  with  ex-President  Taft  and  others,  spent 
one  entire  day  in  opposing  the  bill.  Other  labor  lead- 
ers of  little  less  note  were  heard  in  opposition.  Per- 
sons representing  the  general  public  spoke  in  favor  of 
the  Act,  and  the  general  attorney  for  the  Employers' 
Association  of  Kansas  opposed  it  in  a  strong  argu- 
ment. Organized  labor,  therefore,  and  organized  cap- 
ital representing  the  employers  of  labor,  were  both  rep- 
resented in  the  discussion  and  both  opposed  the  bill. 
After  this  discussion  the  House  of  Representatives  con- 
tinued in  committee  of  the  whole  considering  the  bill. 
Naturally  the  lawyer  members  took  a  prominent  part 
in  the  discussions,  but  bankers,  business  men  and  farm- 
ers also  expressed  themselves  freely  in  the  two  or  three 
weeks'  debate.  In  the  vSenate  it  was  referred  to  the 
judiciary  committee.  That  committee  was  composed 
of  lawyers,  all  of  whom  were  men  of  fine  ability  and 
some  of  whom  were  the  most  prominent  in  the  state. 
The  Senate  judiciary  committee  had  the  bill  under 
consideration,  sitting  for  nine  consecutive  days.  Many 
changes  in  verbiage  were  made  and  the  bill  was  un- 
doubtedly greatly  improved  by  these  criticisms,  con- 
ferences, discussions,  and  considerations,  but  none  of 
the  fundamental  features  were  eliminated  or  materially 
changed. 

The  bill  was  passed  by  both  Houses  with  practical 
unanimity.  This  was  not  because  it  had  been  so  care- 
fully prepared  prior  to  the  session,  nor  because  of  the 
stirring  and  eloquent  appeal  of  the  Governor,  although 
these  matters,  no  doubt,  had  their  influence.  The  bill 
was  passed  because  the  legislators  individually,  after 
the  most  careful  study,  were  convinced  that  such  a  law 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  47 

would  protect  the  general  public  from  the  evils  of  in- 
dustrial warfare  and  give  justice  to  capital  and  labor. 
The  law  today  in  all  essential  respects  is  as  originally 
drafted  and  introduced  into  the  two  houses.  It  is 
not  "hasty  legislation."  It  is  our  best  effort  toward 
legislation  of  this  kind.  It  may  have  faults  and  weak- 
nesses, which  experience  will  develop,  and  which  will 
necessitate  changes  in  the  future,  but  such  faults  and 
weaknesses  are  not  the  results  of  haste  in  the  prepara- 
tion or  passage  of  the  Act. 

THE  TEN    (industrial)    COMMANDMENTS 

When  the  discussion  of  the  bill,  which  afterward  became 
the  Kansas  industrial  court  law,  was  at  its  height  in  the 
special  session  of  the  legislature,  the  following  ten  indus- 
trial commandments,  formulated  by  W.  L.  Huggins,  the 
first  presiding  judge  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations, 
were  printed  in  the  Topeka  Dcily  Capital  and  a  copy  of  the 
paper  was  placed  upon  the  desk  of  each  member  of  the 
house  and  senate.  It  is  claimed  that  the  spirit  and  sub- 
stance of  the  law  is  tersely  stated  in  these  commandments. 

To  the  Worker 

1.  Thou  shalt  not  place  the  union  card  above  our  coun- 
try's flag. 

2.  Thou  shalt  not  deny  to  any  man,  at  any  time,  in  any 
place,  the  right  to  work  as  a  free  man  and  to  receive 
wages  as  stich. 

3.  Thou  shalt  not  demand  a  good  day's  wage  in  return 
for  a  bad  day's  service. 

To  the  Employer 

4.  Thou  shalt  pay  a  fair  wage  to  each  and  every  of  thy 
workers. 

5.  Thou  shalt  furnish  a  safe  and  healthful  place  in 
which,  and  safe  appliances  with  which,  thy  employees  may 
work. 


48  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

6.  Thou  shalt  operate  thy  business  as  continuously  as 
its  nature  will  permit,  to  the  end  that  labor  shall  be  regu- 
larly employed  and  that  the  public  may  not  suffer  for  the 
living  necessities  furnished  through  the  medium  of  thy 
activities. 

7.  Thou  shalt  not  demand  extortionate  profits.  Thou 
shalt  be  content  with  a  fair  return  upon  thy  investment 
used  and  useful  in  thy  business. 

To  Every  Citizen 

8.  Thou  shalt  willingly  pay  a  fair  price  for  all  com- 
modities required  by  thee  from  Labor  and  Capital,  to  the 
end  that  Labor  shall  have  a  just  reward  and  Capital  a  fair 
return. 

9.  Thou  shalt  pay  thy  taxes  cheerfully  and  honestly,  to 
the  end  that  the  obligations  of  the  state  to  all  its  people 
may  be  promptly  and  properly  fulfilled,  liberty  and  jus- 
tice safeguarded  and  the  general  welfare  assured. 

10.  Thou  shalt  honor  and  love  thy  government,  for  it  is 
the  people's  government,  the  best  ever  devised  by  man,  and 
there  is  none  other  like  it  in  all  the  world. 


PART  TWO 

A  FEW  OF  THE  FUNDAMENTALS  OF  THE 
KANSAS  INDUSTRIAL  COURT  LAW 

The  Kansas  Industrial  Act  is  composed  of  thirty 
sections.  Perhaps  it  would  not  be  improper  to  call 
it  the  "Industrial  Code."  No  effort  will  be  made  here 
to  analyze  all  the  provisions  of  the  Act  but  those  sec- 
tions and  parts  which  seem  to  be  fundamental  will  be 
discussed  briefly.  It  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  the 
prime  purpose  of  the  Act  is  the  protection  of  the  pub- 
lic against  the  evils  of  industrial  warfare.  Whatever 
restrictions  may  be  placed  upon  capital  or  labor,  or 
whatever  powers  or  prerogatives  may  be  conferred 
upon  either,  are  incidental  to  the  main  purpose. 

THE  LEGISLATIVE  DECLARATION 

Section  3a  of  the  law  ■*  should  be  very  carefully 
studied  by  all  who  desire  to  become  acquainted  with 
the  purpose  and  intent  of  the  legislation.  By  section 
3a  the  legislature  determines  and  declares  certain  busi- 
nesses to  be  affected  with  a  public  interest  and  there- 
fore subject  to  supervision  by  the  state  as  provided  in 
the  Act.  Technical  lawyers  have  urged  that  the  legis- 
lature has  not  the  power  or  authority  to  declare  any 

*  See  appendix,  p.   141. 

49 


50  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

business  impressed  with  a  public  interest,  and  that  only 
the  courts  may  place  such  a  burden  upon  any  industry. 
This  point  is  perhaps  well  taken.  However,  in  this 
connection,  attention  is  called  to  the  following-  state- 
ment in  the  case  of  American  Coal  Mining-  Company 
7/i.  Special  Coal  and  Food  Commission,  268  Fed.  563 : 

"Now,  is  there  any  rule  for  determining  when  the 
federal  courts  shall  interfere,  under  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment,  with  a  state  statute  enacted  under  the 
police  power?  Yes.  The  best  analogy,  to  my  mind,  is 
the  basis  on  which  an  appellate  court  interferes  with  the 
verdict  of  a  jury.  If  there  is  no  basis  on  which  a  rea- 
sonable man  could  arrive  at  the  result,  it  is  set  aside. 
Otherwise,  it  is  not,  even  though  the  court  sitting  as  a 
jury  might  have  found  the  facts  the  other  way. 

"It  is  only  when  either  no  basis  of  fact  exists  on 
which  to  lay  the  legislature's  finding,  or  when  the  rem- 
edy prescribed  by  the  legislature  has  no  possible  relevant 
bearing  or  connection  with  the  evil  to  be  cured,  that 
the  statute  is  set  aside." 

Attention  is  also  called  to  the  recent  case  of  Block 
vs.  Hirsh,  decided  by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court, 
April  18,  1 92 1,  in  which  is  found  the  following  lan- 
guage : 

"But  a  declaration  by  a  legislature  concerning  public 
conditions  that  by  necessity  and  duty  it  must  know,  is 
entitled  at  least  to  great  respect." 

The  principal  object  of  writing  Section  3a  into  the 
law  was  that  it  might  be  considered  by  the  courts  as  a 
clear  indication  of  the  purpose  and  intent  of  the  legis- 
lature in  the  enactment  of  the  law  as  a  whole.     It  will 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  5 1 

be  noted  that  some  industries  not  heretofore  regarded 
as  impressed  with  a  pubhc  int<erest  are  declared  to  be 
so  affected.  If  the  courts  of  last  resort  should  hold  that, 
as  a  matter  of  law,  any  one  of  the  industries  enumer- 
ated in  Section  3a  is  so  private  in  its  nature  as  that  it 
is  not  affected  with  a  public  interest,  then  the  Kansas 
law,  as  to  that  industry,  would  fail.  This  principle  of 
public  interest  is  one  of  the  fundamentals  upon  which 
the  Kansas  Industrial  Act  must  depend  in  the  final 
test. 

THE  public's  interest  STATED  AND  DEFINED 

The  case  of  Munn  vs.  People  of  the  State  of  Illi- 
nois ^  is  one  of  the  cases  which  was  very  carefully > 
studied  before  the  preparation  of  the  first  draft  of  the 
bill  which  afterward  became  the  Kansas  Industrial 
Law.  Especial  attention  is  called  to  the  quotation  in 
the  Munn  Case  from  Sir  Matthew  Hale's  "De  Porti- 
bus  Maris" : 

"A  man,  for  his  own  private  advantage,  may  in  a 
port  or  town,  set  up  a  wharf  or  crane,  and  may  take 
what  rates  he  and  his  customers  can  agree  for  cranage, 
wharfage,  housellage,  pesage,  for  he  doth  no  more  than 
is  lawful  for  any  man  to  do,  viz. :  makes  the  most  of 
his  own.  ...  If  the  king  or  subject  have  a  public 
wharf,  unto  which  all  persons  that  come  to  that  port 
must  come  and  unlade  or  lade  their  goods  as  for  the 
purpose,  because  they  are  the  wharfs  only  licensed  by 
the  Queen,  ...  or  because  there  is  no  other  wharf  in 
that  port,  as  it  may  fall  out  where  a  port  is  newly 
erected;  in  that  case  there  cannot  be  taken  arbitrary 
and  excessive  duties  for  cranage,  wharfage,  pesage,  etc., 

*94  U.  S.  113;  U.  S.  Sup.  Court  24  Law  Ed.,  p.  77. 


'52  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

neither  can  they  be  enhanced  to  an  immoderate  rate ;  but 
the  duties  must  be  reasonable  and  moderate,  though 
settled  by  the  King's  license  or  charter.  For  now  the 
wharf  and  crane  and  other  conveniences  are  affected 
with  a  public  interest,  and  they  cease  to  be  juris  privati 
only;  as  if  a  man  set  out  a  street  in  new  building  on  his 
own  land,  it  is  now  no  longer  bare  private  interest  but 
is  affected  by  a  public  interest."  '^ 

The  principle  of  public  interest  stated  so  admirably 
and  so  long  ago  by  Sir  Matthew  Hale  is  the  principle 
upon  which  we  have  builded  our  entire  system  of  state 
regulation  of  common  carriers  and  of  public  utilities. 
As  public  necessity  has  required  it,  the  legislatures  and 
courts  have  considered  the  same  principle  in  relation 
to  the  supervision  and  regulation  of  other  businesses 
which  affect  the  public  as  in  the  case  of  fire  and  life 
insurance,  public  health  regulations,  safety  appliance 
acts,  workmen's  compensation,  sanitary  regulations  in 
factories  and  mines,  minimum  wages  for  women  and 
children,  the  prohibition  of  the  employment  of  children 
in  certain  industries,  and  other  matters  of  similar  im- 
port. The  principle  has  been  extended  from  time  to 
time  as  public  necessity  required  it.  Today  we  not  only 
fix  the  rates  which  must  be  charged  by  common  car- 
riers and  public  utilities,  but  we  prescribe  the  quality 

*It  is  recommended  that  the  Munn  Case  (94  U.  S.  278,  24  Law 
Ed.  77)  and  the  large  number  of  authorities  there  cited  should 
be  studied  carefully.  See  also  German  Alliance  Insurance  Com- 
pany V.  Lewis,  233  U.  S.  389,  U.  S.  Sup.  Court  58  Law  Ed.,  p. 
ion,  and  cases  there  cited;  Budd  v.  People  of  New  York,  143 
U.  S.  518,  U.  S.  Sup.  Court  36  Law  Ed.  247,  and  cases  there  cited; 
Julius  Block  V.  Louis  Hirsh,  U.  S.  Sup.  Court,  April  18,  1921,  and 
cases  there  cited ;  Marcus  Brown  Holdings  Company  v.  Marcus 
Feldman,  Benj.  Schwartz,  et  al.,  U.  S.  Sup.  Court,  April  18,  1921, 
and  cases  there  cited ;  American  Coal  Mining  Co.  v.  Special  Coal 
and  Food  Com.,  268  Fed.  563. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  53 

and  compel  the  continuity  of  their  service.  As  civihza- 
tion  has  advanced,  as  our  population  has  increased,  as 
inventions  and  industrial  developments  have  changed 
our  living  conditions  and  our  customs,  we  have  from 
time  to  time,  as  heretofore  indicated,  add^d  to  the  list 
of  businesses  and  vocations  which  have  been  declared 
by  courts  to  be  affected  by  and  with  a  public  interest. 

THE  ANCIENT  LANDMARKS  OF  THE  COMMON  LAW 

The  legislature  of  the  state  of  Kansas  under  the 
Industrial  Act  has  declared  by  Section  3a  that  the  op- 
eration of  the  businesses  of  ( i )  manufacturing  or  pre- 
paring food  products,  (2)  the  manufacture  of  clothing, 
(3)  the  mining  or  production  of  fuel,  (4)  the  trans- 
portation of  food  products,  clothing  and  fuel,  and  (5) 
public  utilities  and  common-carriers  are  affected  with 
a  public  interest.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  legislature 
has  attempted  to  add  to  the  list  of  industries  formerly 
regarded  by  legislatures  and  courts  as  affected  with  a 
public  interest,  at  least  three  others,  to-wit :  the  manu- 
facture of  food,  the  manufacture  of  clothing,  and  the 
mining  or  production  of  fuel. 

The  legislature,  in  the  act  under  discussion,  adhered 
strictly  to  established  principles  and  was  guided  by  the 
ancient  landmarks  of  the  law.  Kansas,  by  legislative 
enactment,  in  its  early  history,  declared : 

"The  common  law  of  England  and  all  statutes  and 
acts  of  Parliament  in  aid  thereof,  made  prior  to  the 
fourth  year  of  James  the  First,  and  which  are  of  a  gen- 
eral nature,  not  local  to  that  kingdom  and  not  repug- 
nant to  or  inconsistent  with  the  constitution  of   the 


54  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

United  States  and  the  act  entitled  'an  act  to  organize 
the  Territory  of  Nebraska  and  Kansas'  or  any  statute 
law  which  may  from  time  to  time  be  made  or  passed  by 
this  or  any  subsequent  Legislative  Assembly  of  the  Ter- 
ritory of  Kansas,  shall  be  the  rule  of  action  and  de- 
cision in  the  Territory,  any  law,  custom  or  usage  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding."  ^ 

It  has  been  said  by  eminent  American  jurists  that : 

"The  common  law  grew  with  society,  not  ahead  of  it. 
As  society  became  more  complex,  and  new  demands 
were  made  upon  the  law  by  reason  of  new  circum- 
stances, the  courts,  originally  in  England,  out  of  the 
storehouse  of  reason  and  good  sense,  declared  the  'com- 
mon law.'  But  since  courts  have  had  an  existence  in 
America,  they  have  never  hesitated  to  take  upon  them- 
selves the  responsibility  of  saying  what  is  the  common 
law."  « 

That, 

"The  flexibility  of  the  common  law  consists  not  in 
the  change  of  great  and  essential  principles,  but  in  the 
application  of  old  principles  to  new  cases,  and  in  the 
modification  of  the  rules  flowing  from  them,  to  such 
cases  as  may  arise;  so  as  to  preserve  the  reason  of  the 
rule  and  the  spirit  of  the  law."  ® 

That, 

"The  inexhaustible  and  everchanging  complications 
of  human  affairs  are  constantly  presenting  new  ques- 
tions and  new  conditions  which  the  law  must  provide 
for  as  they  arise ;  and  the  law  has  expansive  and  adap- 
tive force  enough  to  respond  to  the  demands  thus  made 

'  Laws  of  Kansas  Territory,  1859. 

*  Lane  v.  Spokane,  etc.,  Railway  Co.,  21  Wash.  119. 

"Rensselaer  Glass  Factory  v.  Reid,  5  Cow.  (N.  Y.)  587. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  55 

of  it,  not  by  subverting  but  by  forming  new  combina- 
tions and  making  new  applications  out  of  its  already 
established  principles."  ^^ 

In  the  "everchanging  complications  of  human  af- 
fairs" "new  questions"  and  "new  conditions"  had 
arisen  prior  to  January  5,  1920.  The  legislature  of  the 
state  of  Kansas,  in  view  of  these  changes,  attempted 
to  extend  the  application  of  the  ancient  principles  of 
the  common  law  in  order  that  the  public  peace,  the  pub- 
lic health,  and  the  general  welfare  might  be  better  pro- 
tected. 

THE  APPLICATION  OF  ANCIENT  PRINCIPLES  TO  MODERN 
CONDITIONS 

Again  it  is  urged  that  the  reader  make  a  careful 
study  of  the  cases  heretofore  cited  and  referred  to, 
and  it  is  suggested  that  the  public,  under  modern  con- 
ditions, is  tremendously  interested  in  the  manufacture 
of  food  and  clothing  and  the  production  of  fuel.  These 
are  the  three  prime  necessities  of  every  civilized  people. 
They  are  more  important  than  transportation,  street 
car  service,  telephone  service,  fire  insurance,  or  the 
storage  of  grain.  They  are  more  important  to  the 
general  public  than  the  workmen's  compensation,  mini- 
mum wages  for  women  and  children,  or  safety  appli- 
ances. Under  present  industrial  and  marketing  condi- 
tions, the  great  packing  industries  of  the  country  not 
only  have  a  practical  monopoly  in  the  business  of  pro- 
ducing, preparing  and  furnishing  meat  products  for 
public  consumption,  but  the  packing  plant  and  the 
stockyards  adjacent  thereto  also  afford  the  only  mar- 

"  Woodman  v.  Pitman,  79  Me.  456. 


56  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

ket  for  the  farmers'  livestock.  The  producer  of  Hve- 
stock  is  compelled  to  accept  in  payment  for  his  "raw" 
product  whatever  the  owners  of  that  market  offer  him. 
As  a  public  market,  therefore,  if  for  no  other  reason, 
the  packing'  plant  is  impressed  with  a  public  interest. 
Public  stockyards  have  been  so  impressed  for  many 
years  on  the  market  theory. ^^  The  packing  plant  is 
the  more  important  part  of  the  combination.  Now,  the 
same  may  be  said  with  equal  force  concerning  the  pro- 
duction of  flour.  The  mill  and  the  elevator  by  which 
the  mill  carries  on  its  business  afford  the  market  for 
the  wheat  produced  by  the  farmer.  The  business  of 
milling  has  become  concentrated  and  highly  specialized, 
and  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  price  of  wheat 
is  fixed  largely  by  world  conditions,  yet  the  milling 
industry  in  the  United  States  of  America  influences 
that  price.  It  also  influences,  or  perhaps  controls,  the 
quantity,  the  quality  and  the  price  of  that  food  prod- 
uct which,  when  properly  prepared  by  the  housewife  or 
the  baker,  has  been  called  the  "Staf¥  of  life."  The  same 
may  be  said  as  to  the  manufacture  of  clothing  in  these 
later  days.  The  clothing  for  the  entire  household, 
which  in  the  days  of  our  fathers  was  manufactured 
within  the  family,  is  now  all  produced  by  the  cotton 
or  the  woolen  mill  or  the  clothing  factory. 

Of  what  avail  is  it  then  that  the  farmers  produce 
livestock  if  the  packing  plants  be  closed  and  thus  the 
means  of  converting  live  animals  into  food  for  human 
beings  be  suspended  or  destroyed?  Of  what  avail  is  it 
that  the  grain  be  harvested,  if  the  mill  and  the  elevator 
refuse  to  function  and  thus  afford  a  market  for  that 

■"Ratcliff  V.  Stock  Yards  Co.,  74  Kan.  i. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  57 

grain  and  produce  food  for  the  public  ?  When  it  comes 
to  the  production  of  fuel,  every  home  in  this  land  is 
directly  interested.  Not  only  is  fuel  necessary  to  the 
preparation  of  the  food  for  the  family,  but  in  this  cli- 
mate a  very  large  portion  of  the  year  it  is  a  part  of 
the  home  and  shelter.  The  support  of  the  homes  of 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  working  people  engaged  in 
all  manner  of  industries  is  dependent  upon  the  supply 
of  fuel,  for  upon  that  depends  the  continuation  of  the 
industry  in  which  the  bread-winner  is  engaged  and 
from  which  he  draws  his  wages.  The  mining  and  pro- 
duction of  fuel  has  been  called  the  "Key"  industry. 

The  internal  commerce  of  the  country,  affecting  as 
it  does  the  very  life  of  the  nation  itself,  depends  for  its 
existence  upon  the  efficiency  with  which  the  industry 
of  mining  and  producing  fuel  is  carried  on.  Trans- 
portation without  fuel  is  impossible.  Again,  of  what 
avail  is  it  that  the  channels  of  commerce  be  kept  open 
if  there  be  no  coal  produced  to  be  transported?  If  the 
government  have  the  power  and  authority  to  prescribe 
rates  and  other  regulations  for  fire  insurance,  for  the 
storage  of  grain,  for  the  carriage  of  passengers,  of  the 
rates  to  be  charged  for  the  transportation  of  commodi- 
ties, of  the  quality  and  continuity  of  service  in  public 
utilities  and  common  carriers,  and  the  multitude  of 
regulations  which  have  been  thrown  around  the  vari- 
ous businesses  which  affect  the  public  convenience,  can 
it  be  said  that  the  government  must  stand  by  powerless 
and  see  the  people  reduced  to  poverty  and  want  because 
the  great  business  interests  owning  the  coal  deposits  of 
the  country  choose  to  close  down  the  mines,  or  because 
the  great  packing  interests  conclude  to  take  a  vacation, 


58  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

or  because  the  flour  millers  are  dissatisfied  with  market 
conditions  and  conclude  to  force  the  people  to  meet 
their  requirements  by  limiting  the  supply? 

Here  we  are  met  by  the  determined  objection  of 
some  corporations  and  other  employers  of  labor  who 
brand  the  law  as  a  "long  step  toward  state  socialism." 
They  say  that  packing  houses,  flouring  mills,  sugar 
mills,  cotton  and  woolen  mills,  clothing  factories,  coal 
mines  and  oil  fields  are  private  industries.  They  learn- 
edly talk  of  the  ancient  Sumptuary  Laws  of  England 
by  which  it  was  attempted  to  fix  the  price  of  almost 
every  commodity  in  general  use  and  the  wages  of  labor 
in  almost  every  avocation.  These  laws  failed  and  the 
opponents  of  the  Kansas  law  urge  that  for  the  same 
reasons  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law  will  fail.^^  The 
same  dismal  prediction  of  failure  has  been  made  against 
every  law  which  has  been  proposed  to  supervise,  regu- 
late, or  control  common  carriers,  public  utilities,  banks 
and  insurance  companies.  The  same  prophecy  was 
confidently  published  by  the  same  class  of  thinkers  in 
regard  to  the  Bank  Guaranty  Act,  the  Blue  Sky  Law, 
the  Welfare  Commission,  and  the  Workmen's  Com- 
pensation Act  in  Kansas.  It  is  not  necessary  to  add 
to  W'hat  has  already  been  said  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
businesses  enumerated  in  Section  3a.  They  are,  in  fact 
and  in  law,  impressed  with  a  public  interest,  and  there- 
fore they  are,  as  stated  in  the  law, 

"subject  to  supervision  by  the  state  as  herein  provided 
for  the  purpose  of  preventing  industrial  strife,  disorder 
and  waste,  .and  securing  the  regular  and  orderly  con- 

"  See   dissenting   opinion   of   Justice   Field,    Munn   v.    Illinois, 
supra. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  59 

duct  of  the  businesses  directly  affecting  the  living  con- 
ditions of  the  people  of  this  state,  and  in  the  promotion 
of  the  general  welfare."  ^^ 


LIMITATIONS  ON  STATE  REGULATION 

Not  only  is  it  urged  that  some  of  these  businesses 
are  purely  private  and  therefore  not  subject  to  any 
regulation  by  the  state,  but  it  is  also  claimed  that  the 
Kansas  law  attempts  to  bring  these  private  industries 
under  the  general  regulatory  powers  of  the  state,  and 
thus  to  treat  them  as  though  they  were  public  utilities. 
Under  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law,  we  have  not  sub- 
jected the  industries  named  to  the  general  regulatory 
powers  of  the  state.  Wt  have  provided  for  regulation 
in  case  of  emergency  only.  The  law  provides  that  in 
case  a  controversy,  or  other  circumstance,  arises 
which  may  endanger  the  continuity  or  efficiency  of 
service,  or  affect  the  production  or  transportation  of 
the  necessaries  of  life,  and  thereby  endanger  the  pub- 
lic peace  or  threaten  the  public  health,  power  and  au- 
thority is  vested  in  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations.^'* 
Even  the  limited  supervision  which  the  Court  is  given 
over  contracts  of  employment  can  be  exercised  only 
"in  any  action  or  proceeding  properly  before  it  (the 
Industrial  Court)  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act."^^ 
Reading  this  provision  in  connection  with  Section  7  of 
the  Act,  it  will  be  noted  that  no  proceeding  can  be  prop- 
erly before  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  except 

"  Since  these  lines  were  written,  the  Supreme  Court  of  Kansas 
has  definitely  decided  the  question  m  favor  of  this  law  in  State, 
ex  rel.,  v.  Howat,  et  al.,  June  11,  1921. 

"  See  Section  7,  Kansas  Industrial  Law. 

"  See  Section  9,  Ibid. 


60  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

in  case  of  a  public  interest  arising  by  reason  of  some 
of  the  circumstances  stated  in  Section  7.  Thus  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations  does  not  attach  except  in  case  of  an  emer- 
gency which  threatens  the  public  peace  or  the  public 
health.  The  law  provides  further  that  the  order  made 
by  the  Court  shall  be  temporary  in  its  nature.  It  is 
provided  that : 

"Said  order  shall  continue  for  such  reasonable  time 
as  may  be  fixed  by  said  Court  or  until  changed  by  the 
agreement  of  the  parties  with  the  approval  of  the 
court."  ^^ 

It  is  therefore  plain  that  even  in  case  of  an  emergency 
threatening  the  public  peace  or  the  public  health,  any 
order  made  by  the  Court  is  for  the  temporary  purpose 
only  of  preventing  injury  to  the  public  and  that  when 
the  emergency  is  passed,  the  business  goes  back  to  its 
normal  condition,  the  state  steps  out,  and  there  is  no 
further  regulation  of  the  business. 

NECESSITY  OF  CONTINUITY  OF  OPERATION 

In  Section  6,  however,  it  is  declared  that : 

"It  is  necessary  for  the  public  peace,  the  public 
health  and  the  general  welfare  that  such  businesses 
shall  be  operated  with  reasonable  continuity  and  effi- 
ciency in  order  that  the  people  of  this  state  may  live  in 
peace  and  security  and  be  supplied  with  the  necessaries 
of  life." 

To  that  end  it  is  provided  that  no  person,  firm  or  cor- 
"  See  Section  8,  Kansas  Industrial  Law. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  6l 

poration  or  association  of  persons,  shall  in  any  manner 
or  to  any  extent  hinder,  delay,  limit  or  suspend  such 
continuous  and  efficient  operation  with  the  intent  to 
evade  the  purpose  and  provisions  of  the  law. 

Many  years  ago  it  was  discovered  that  powerful 
business  interests  were  able  by  combination  and  collu- 
sion to  "juggle"  the  market  and  thereby  to  prey  upon 
the  public.  The  Sherman  Anti-trust  law  was  enacted 
for  the  purpose  of  preventing  such  unlawful  "combin- 
ations in  restraint  of  trade."  There  is  a  suspicion 
among  well-informed  people  that  strikes  in  certain  in- 
dustries have  been  called  by  collusion  of  unscrupulous 
leaders  of  labor  and  equally  unscrupulous  heads  of 
big  businesses  for  the  purpose  of  curtailing  the  produc- 
tion and  the  supply  of  some  necessary  of  life,  thereby 
enabling  the  producers  to  advance  the  price.  It  was 
publicly  charged  only  recently  that  certain  big  business 
interests  were  purposely  oppressing  labor  with  the  in- 
tent to  cause  a  general  nation-wide  strike  in  the  indus- 
try and  thus  to  reduce  the  price  of  the  raw  product 
to  the  industry  and  the  price  of  the  finished  product 
to  the  public.  This  would  enable  the  industry  affected 
to  make  a  big  profit  from  each  end  of  the  transaction. 

It  has  always  been  a  difficult  thing  to  prove  a  con- 
spiracy in  restraint  of  trade  and  the  Kansas  legislature 
did  not  rest  the  public  interest  solely  upon  the  ability 
to  prove  such  conspiracy.  The  declaration  in  Section 
6  and  other  provisions  of  the  law  are  intended  to  en- 
able the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  to  act  without 
the  necessity  of  proving  even  a  criminal  intent  and 
without  the  necessity  of  proving  a  combination  or  col- 
lusion.    If  the  continuity  or  efficiency  of  operation  is 


62  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

such  as  to  injure  the  pubhc  by  a  curtailment  of  the 
supply,  then  the  court  may  act  in  the  premises.  In 
this  particular  respect  the  industries  affected  by  the 
Industrial  Act  are  placed  upon  the  same  basis  as  a 
public  utility.  The  public  utility  of  whatever  kind  or 
nature  must  furnish  continuous  and  efficient  service. 
It  is  not  permitted,  under  the  laws  of  the  land,  to  cease 
operations  unless  it  receives  authority  to  do  so  from 
the  government.  This  is  a  very  important  matter.  The 
effect  of  such  regulation  may  be  very  far-reaching  and 
should  be  very  beneficial  to  the  public. 

It  is  further  provided,  in  fairness  to  the  industry, 
that  in  case  any  person,  firm,  or  corporation  engaged  in 
any  of  such  businesses  may  desire  to  suspend,  limit,  or 
cease  operations,  application  may  be  made  to  the  Indus- 
trial Court,  and  said  Court  shall  hear  such  application 
promptly  and  if  it  shall  be  found  that  the  same  is  made 
in  good  faith  and  is  meritorious,  authority  to  limit  or 
cease  production  shall  be  granted  by  order  of  the  court. 
There  is  another  provision  relating  to  businesses  espe- 
cially affected  by  seasons  and  market  conditions,  which 
provides  that  rules  may  be  made  permitting  the  cessa- 
tion or  limitation  of  such  businesses  when  necessity 
may  require  it.^"^ 

THE  POLICE  POWER 

The  law  is  intended  to  protect  the  public.  That  in- 
tent is  so  apparent  that  it  cannot  be  misunderstood.  It 
is  the  police  power  of  the  state  which  is  invoked.  It  is 
claimed  that  every  provision  of  the  Kansas  Industrial 
Act  is  within  the  police  power  of  the  state  in  the  nar- 

"  See  opinion  of  Industrial   Court,   Docket  No.  ."^803,   Millers 
Case,  Appendix,  p.  177. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  6^ 

rower  sense  of  that  term,  but  taking  the  more  compre- 
hensive definition  of  the  term  "police  power,"  it  seems 
that  there  can  be  no  question  in  the  matter.^^ 

IN"  CASE  OF  EMERGENCY 

No  power  is  granted  to  the  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions to  interfere  except  in  case  of  such  an  emergency 
as  makes  it  necessary  that  the  state  step  in  to  protect 
the  public.  In  case  of  a  great  public  emergency  the 
law  grants  power  to  the  state  to  take  over  the  business. 
It  is  provided  that : 

"In  case  of  the  suspension,  limitation,  or  cessation  of 
the  operation  of  any  such  industry,  if  it  shall  appear  to 
the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  that  such  suspension, 
limitation,  or  cessation  will  seriously  affect  the  public 
welfare  by  endangering  the  public  peace  or  threatening 
the  public  health,  then  the  Court  is  authorized  and  di- 
rected to  take  over,  control,  direct,  and  operate  said 
industry  during  such  emergency." 

This  part  of  Section  20  of  the  Industrial  Act  should 
be  interesting  when  considered  in  connection  with  the 
experience  of  the  state  of  Kansas  in  operating  the 
coal  mines  during  the  strike  of  1919.  At  that  time 
the  attorney  general  applied  to  the  supreme  court  of 
the  state  for  a  receivership,  under  the  Anti-trust  Laws, 
alleging  a  conspiracy  or  combination  to  cease  produc- 
tion. It  is  very  doubtful  whether  any  such  combina- 
tion or  conspiracy  existed.     The  strike  was  a  reality, 

"See  Bacon  v.  Walker,  204  U.  S.  311,  31  Law  Ed.  490;  IMuller 
V.  Oregon,  208  U.  S.  412,  52  Law  Ed.  551 ;  Central  Lumber  Co.  v. 
S.  Dak.,  226  U.  S.  157,  57  Law  Ed.  164;  Holden  r.  Hardy,  169 

U.  S.  366,  43  Law  Ed.  ;  Dakota  Central  Tel.  Co.  v.  S.  Dak., 

ex  rel  Payne,  250  U.  S.  281,  63  Law  Ed.  Qio. 


64  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

the  conspiracy  or  combination  was  a  surmise.  Some 
slight  evidence  perhaps  could  have  been  produced  to 
prove  that  allegation  but  it  was  never  necessary.  The 
operators  did  not  answer  in  the  case  and  receivers  were 
appointed  on  the  prima  facie  showing  made  by  the 
state  in  default  of  any  defense  by  the  operators.  The 
unionized  miners  absolutely  refused  to  work  under  state 
receivership  and  volunteers  were  called  for.  These 
volunteers  were  wholly  inexperienced  in  the  mining  of 
coal  but  were  the  flower  of  the  state's  young  manhood, 
many  being  ex-service  men.  Under  the  state  law  and 
under  the  laws  of  humanity,  untrained  miners  could  not 
be  sent  into  the  deep  mines.  Only  the  surface  or 
strip  mines  could  be  operated.  The  presence  of  the 
state  militia  and  a  contingent  of  troops  from  the  regu- 
lar army  preserved  the  peace  and  prevented  physical 
violence  being  used  against  the  volunteer  miners.  But 
the  problem  of  the  production  of  coal  in  the  Kansas 
field  under  strike  conditions  was  not  solved.  The  strike 
was  called  off  because  of  orders  made  by  the  U.  S. 
Court  at  Indianapolis.  The  regular  miners  returned  to 
work  and  the  state  stepped  out.  But  the  problem,  the 
real  problem,  was  never  met.  If  the  strike  had  con- 
tinued through  the  long,  hard  winter,  with  no  coal 
being  produced  except  from  the  surface  mines  by  un- 
trained volunteer  workers,  the  story  might  have  been 
different.  The  coal  which  it  was  possible  to  produce 
under  such  circumstances  would  have  been  but  a  very 
meager  part  of  that  which  would  have  been  absolutely 
necessary  to  prevent  great  suffering  in  the  state  during 
the  balance  of  the  winter.  It  might  have  been  neces- 
sary for  the  state  to  import  non-union  miners.    It  might 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  65 

have  been  very  hard  to  get  non-union  miners.  The 
state  might  have  stayed  there  in  the  mines  with  the 
mihtia  to  preserve  the  peace  for  an  indefinite  period. 
Section  20  of  the  Industrial  Act  is  meant  to  meet  that 
situation.  If  such  a  crisis  should  occur  again,  under 
the  provisions  of  Section  20,  without  the  necessity  of 
proving  any  conspiracy  or  combination,  or  any  viola- 
tion of  the  anti-trust  laws,  but  merely  by  reason  of  a 
public  emergency,  the  state  may  take  over  the  mines, 
and  have  complete  control  of  the  situation  until  such 
time  as  the  emergency  shall  pass.  It  is  to  be  most  sin- 
cerely hoped  that  there  will  be  no  such  occasion.  If 
the  emergency  should  arise,  it  might  be  necessary  to 
have  an  emergency  police  force  with  which  to  patrol 
the  mining  district,  preserve  the  peace,  protect  the  men 
who  desire  to  work,  and  prevent  industrial  disturbance. 
There  is  a  provision  further,  however,  that  a  fair 
return  and  compensation  shall  be  paid  to  the  owners  of 
such  industry,  and  a  fair  wage  to  the  workers  engaged 
therein  during  such  state  operation.  During  the  emer- 
gency of  the  World  War,  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  by  act  of  Congress,  did  precisely  what 
is  provided  may  be  done  by  Section  20  of  the  Kansas 
Industrial  Law  in  case  of  an  emergency.  The  govern- 
ment took  over  the  railroads,  operated  them,  paid  the 
expenses  out  of  the  Federal  Treasury,  collected  the 
revenues,  guaranteed  a  fair  return  to  the  owners,  paid 
that  out  of  the  public  funds,  and  when  the  emergency 
had  passed  handed  the  roads  back  to  the  owners.  Was 
that  "state  socialism?" 


66  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

LABOR  ALSO  IMPRESSED  WITH  PUBLIC  INTEREST 

Still  further  applying  old  legal  principles  to  new  cir- 
cumstances and  conditions,  the  Kansas  legislature, 
under  Section  3b,  declares  that: 

"Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  engaged  in  any 
such  industry  or  employment,  or  in  the  operation  of 
such  public  'utilities  or  common  carriers  within  the 
state  of  Kansas,  either  in  the  capacity  of  owner,  officer, 
or  worker,  shall  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this 
act." 

This  declaration  seeks  not  only  to  impress  capital 
invested  in  these  essential  industries  with  a  public 
interest,  but  it  also  declares  that  labor  engaged 
therein  is  impressed  with  a  public  interest  and 
that  it  owes  a  public  duty.  The  law-making  body, 
under  Section  3b,  recognized  the  fact  that  the 
public  interest  is  affected  by  the  limitation  or  sus- 
pension of  such  essential  industries  in  the  same  degree 
when  that  limitation  or  suspension  is  affected  by  labor 
and  when  it  is  affected  by  capital.  Of  what  avail  is  it 
that  a  corporation  owning  and  operating  a  railroad  be 
regulated  by  law  and  required  to  furnish  service  of  a 
proper  quality  and  continuity,  if,  in  the  exercise  of  the 
alleged  and  pretended  inalienable  right  of  the  laborer  to 
strike  and  by  conspiracy,  by  duress,  or  by  intimidation 
to  prevent  others  from  working,  the  entire  service  may 
be  suspended  and  the  public  left  to  suffer  the  inconveni- 
ence and  hardship  resulting  from  such  suspension? 
Why  regulate  one-half  and  leave  the  other  unregulated  ? 
What  right  has  labor  engaged  in  these  essential  indus- 
tries to  freeze  or  starve  the  public  by  the  strike  which 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  6/ 

capital  might  not  claim  by  the  lockout  or  by  suspension 
of  the  business.  When  citizens  of  a  central  Kansas 
town  find  their  public  utilities  forced  to  shut  down 
and  their  homes  left  cold  by  reason  of  a  shortage  of 
fuel,  what  is  the  difference  whether  that  shortage  of 
fuel  is  caused  by  the  refusal  of  the  owners  of  the  mine 
to  produce  coal  or  by  the  refusal  of  the  miners  to  work 
or  to  permit  others  to  work?  If  government  have  the 
right  under  the  police  power  to  protect  the  health  and 
general  welfare  of  the  public,  does  not  that  power 
extend  to  labor  as  well  as  to  capital? 

THE  EVEN  BALANCE  OF  THE  SCALES  OF  JUSTICE 

Under  the  provisions  of  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law 
men  who  invest  their  capital  in  the  essential  industries 
and  men  who  engage  themselves  as  workers  therein  are 
placed  upon  an  absolute  equality.  The  law  does  not 
undertake  to  compel  any  man  to  invest  his  money  in 
any  of  the  essential  industries.  He  is  perfectly  free  to 
choose  his  own  investment.  The  law  does  not  attempt 
to  compel  any  man  to  engage  as  a  worker  in  any  of  the 
essential  industries.  He  is  absolutely  free  to  choose 
his  O'wn  employment.  The  law  does  say  to  the  inves- 
tor, "If  you  invest  your  money  in  any  of  these  essen- 
tial industries,  you  must  submit  to  such  regulation  as  is 
necessary  in  the  protection  of  the  public."  The  law 
does  say  to  the  laborer,  "If  you  engage  yourself  as  a 
worker  in  any  of  these  essential  industries,  you  must 
submit  to  such  regulation  as  is  necessary  in  the  pro- 
tection of  the  public."  The  law  does  say  to  the  inves- 
tor in  the  essential  industries,  "If  you  are  not  satisfied 
with  the  regulation  which  the  state  exercises  over  the 


68  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

industry,  you  may  change  your  investment.  All  you 
need  to  do  is  to  find  a  purchaser  for  your  stock  or  your 
interest  therein."  The  law  does  say  to  the  laborer  en- 
gaged in  the  essential  industries,  "If  you  are  not  satis- 
fied with  the  regulation  which  the  state  exercises  over 
the  industry,  you  may  change  your  occupation  at  any 
time.  All  you  need  to  do  is  to  find  another  job."  The 
state  by  the  Industrial  Law  says  to  the  investor  and  to 
the  laborer  alike,  "The  public  has  an  interest  in  the 
business  in  which  you  are  engaged  because  you  are 
producing  or  transporting  the  necessaries  of  life. 
Therefore  you  shall  not  engage  in  a  private  quarrel 
which  will  either  temporarily  or  permanently  destroy 
the  business  in  which  the  public  is  so  vitally  interested. 
The  state  will  provide  you  with  a  means  and  with  in- 
strumentalities by  which  you  may  adjudicate  your 
controversies,  but  in  no  event  shall  you  invade  the  pub- 
lic's right  to  food,  to  clothing,  to  fuel,  and  to  public 
service." 

IS  THE  INDUSTRIAL  CONTROVERSY   JUSTICIABLE 

This  brings  us  to  the  question  whether  the  indus- 
trial controversy  is,  or  is  not,  subject  to  adjudication. 
The  Kansas  Industrial  Law  provides  for  the  adjudica- 
tion of  industrial  disputes  in  very  much  the  same  way 
that  other  classes  of  controversies  have  been  adjudi- 
cated in  all  the  Anglo-Saxon  countries  of  the  world  for 
hundreds  of  years.  We  accept  without  question  the 
authority  and  jurisdiction  of  our  courts  to  adjudicate 
matters  affecting  the  life,  the  liberty  and  the  property 
of  the  citizen.  A  man  commits  a  capital  crime.  He  is 
found  guilty  by  a  jury  of  his  peers.    He  is  hanged  be- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  69 

cause  of  the  judgment  and  sentence  of  a  court.  The 
liberty  of  the  individual  is  subject  to  adjudication  and 
there  is  a  great  variety  of  crimes  for  the  commission  of 
any  one  of  which  he  may  be  placed  in  jail  or  in  the 
penitentiary.  Every  dollar's  worth  of  property  which 
he  possesses  may  be  taken  away  from  him  by  the  ad- 
judication of  a  court.  His  domestic  relations  are  sub- 
ject to  adjudication.  Even  his  children  may  be  taken 
away  from  him  under  the  juvenile  laws  of  the  land. 

If  a  man's  right  to  live  be  justiciable,  if  his  liberty 
may  be  taken  away  from  him  by  the  judgment  of  a 
court,  if  all  his  property  may  be  subjected  to  the  claims 
of  his  creditors  by  a  civil  judgment,  if  his  domestic  re- 
lations be  subject  to  adjudication,  surely  then  such  pro- 
saic matters  as  hours  of  labor,  working  conditions, 
and  wages  are  also  matters  which  may  be  adjudicated. 
But  the  Kansas  law  does  not  make  the  industrial  con- 
troversy subject  to  adjudication  except  in  case  of  the 
public  interest.  It  is  only  when  by  reason  of  circum- 
stances arising  out  of  the  controversy,  the  party  of  the 
third  part, — the  general  public, — acquires  an  interest, 
that  the  state  steps  in.  In  the  public  interest  and  in 
the  public  interest  only  may  the  courts  adjudicate  and 
settle  the  industrial  controversy. 

THE    ADJUDICATION    EXEMPLIFIED 

A  Kansas  farmer  employed  a  man  to  dig  and  com- 
plete for  him  a  well  to  furnish  water  for  domestic  use. 
The  man  employed  to  do  the  work  had  had  great  ex- 
perience in  well  digging  and  was  equipped  for  the 
business.  He  stated  to  the  farmer  that  it  would  be 
impossible  in  advance  to  tell  how  much  the  cost  would 


70  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

be  or  to  predict  the  result.  The  farmhouse  was  on 
high  land.  It  was  impossible  to  foretell  how  deep  into 
the  earth  the  well  would  have  to  be  extended,  how  many 
feet  of  limestone  would  have  to  be  penetrated,  how 
much  gravel,  how  much  clay,  etc.  About  the  best 
contract  that  could  be  made  was  that  the  well  digger 
and  his  two  grown  sons  should  install  their  well  dig- 
ging machinery  and  proceed  to  sink  the  well  to  such 
depth  as  water  could  be  found,  then  they  should  wall 
it  up  and  complete  it  and  the  farmer  should  pay  what 
the  work  was  reasonably  worth.  It  was  done.  When 
the  bill  was  presented  the  farmer  refused  to  pay  it, 
claiming  it  was  too  much. 

A  suit  was  brought  in  the  district  court  of  the  county 
in  which  the  transaction  took  place.  The  action  was 
of  the  kind  lawyers  call  a  suit  in  "quantum  meruit," 
or  roughly  and  liberally  interpreted — a  suit  for  what 
it  was  worth.  The  district  judge  presided  and  a  jury 
of  twelve  good  and  lawful  men  were  impaneled  and 
sworn  to  try  the  cause.  The  plaintiff  introduced  his 
evidence.  He  showed  first  the  contract  by  which  the 
farmer  agreed  to  pay  what  the  services  were  reason- 
ably and  fairly  worth ;  second,  that  he  performed  the 
services;  third,  the  nature  of  the  work — the  depth  to 
which  the  well  was  dug,  the  character  of  the  various 
strata  penetrated  in  the  digging  process,  the  number 
of  feet  of  limestone,  of  soapstone,  of  clay,  and  of 
gravel;  the  walling  up  and  the  completion  of  the  well; 
the  result  as  to  the  production  of  water  in  sufficient 
quantities;  the  expenditure  for  explosives  in  getting 
through  the  limestone ;  the  hazards  of  the  work,  the 
skill    required,    the    number    of    days    employed,    and 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  yi 

finally  the  usual  and  ordinary  wage  paid  for  such  serv- 
ices in  that  community.  Then  the  defendant  intro- 
duced such  evidence  as  he  had  in  his  defense.  The 
court  instructed  the  jury  as  to  the  law,  which  briefly 
and  roughly  stated  is  that  the  well  diggers  should  re- 
cover what  their  services  were  reasonably  and  fairly 
worth  in  consideration  of  all  the  circumstances  shown 
by  the  evidence.  The  jury  retired  to  the  jury  room 
and  later  in  the  same  day  returned  into  court  a  verdict 
by  which  they  found  for  the  plaintiff  in  practically  the 
sum  claimed  by  him.  Judgment  was  rendered  by  the 
court  upon  the  verdict  and  the  judgment  and  cost 
were  later  paid  by  the  farmer. 

No  one  disputed  that  this  was  an  adjudication  in  a 
matter  of  wages.  The  tribunal  before  which  it  was 
tried,  beginnning  at  the  time  of  the  trial,  reached  back 
over  a  period  of,  we  will  say,  sixty  days  and  adjudi- 
cated and  determined  the  controversy  according  to 
established  rules  and  the  law  of  the  land.  It  was  an 
ordinary  lawsuit  in  a  court  of  general  jurisdiction. 

Take  now  a  case  tried  before  the  Court  of  Indus- 
trial Relations.  Complaint  is  filed  by  a  body  of  work- 
men engaged  in  a  meat  packing  plant.  They  are  about 
to  strike  and  engage  in  industrial  warfare  which 
would  temporarily  close  the  plant,  cause  breaches  of 
the  peace  and  economic  waste ;  perhaps  spread  to 
other  plants  of  the  same  kind,  limit  the  supply  of  food, 
materially  injure  and  perhaps  temporarily  destroy  the 
market  for  livestock  and  generally  disturb  economic 
conditions  in  the  community,  perhaps  in  the  entire  state. 
The  Industrial  Law  gives  the  Industrial  Court  juris- 
diction of  such  cases,  in  the  event  of  a  failure  of  the 


y2  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

parties  to  agree.  The  case  is  called  for  trial  in  the 
Industrial  Court,  both  sides  appearing.  Complainants 
introduce  their  evidence.  The  character  of  the  work 
can  be  determined  beforehand  because  the  work  in 
which  each  man  is  engaged  is  the  same  every  day  in 
the  year.  Each  man  works  at  his  usual  place,  he  does 
the  same  thing  under  the  same  conditions,  with  the 
same  implements  or  machinery,  in  the  same  way,  day 
after  day,  from  year's  end  to  year's  end.  There  is 
nothing  unknown  about  the  occupation.  The  physical 
strength  required,  the  skill  needed,  the  hazards  of  the 
employment,  the  sanitary  conditions — all  are  known 
beforehand.  In  this  respect  this  suit  differs  from  the 
one  first  mentioned.  The  evidence  as  to  the  nature  of 
the  work  and  working  conditions  is  all  introduced  and 
there  is  also  evidence  as  to  the  usual  and  customary 
wage  in  similar  occupations  in  the  community.  There 
is  also  evidence  as  to  living  costs  as  bearing  upon  the 
question  of  a  fair  wage.  The  company  which  owns 
and  operates  the  packing  plant  introduces  its  evidence 
in  its  defense.  The  Industrial  Court  upon  the  evidence, 
taking  into  consideration  the  industrial  law  which  pro- 
vides that  workers  in  the  essential  industries  shall  have 
a  fair  wage  and  moral  and  healthful  surroundings,  ap- 
praising also  the  condition  of  the  business  and  the 
right  of  capital  invested  in  the  essential  industries  to  a 
fair  return,  and  considering  all  these  matters,  makes 
its  findings  of  fact,  enters  its  conclusions  of  law  and 
makes  its  order.  Its  order  extends  sixty  days  into  the 
future — not  sixty  days  into  the  past.  The  Industrial 
Court,  therefore,  technically  speaking,  is  providing  for 
the    future   and   its    duties   are   therefore    legislative. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  73 

Only  when  the  supreme  court  finally  passes  upon  the 
matter  in  case  of  a  review,  does  adjudication  in  the 
technical  sense  take  place.  But  all  the  processes  in 
the  two  cases  are  identical  with  that  one  technical  ex- 
ception. One  applies  to  the  past,  the  other  to  the 
future.  The  same  qualities  of  mind,  the  same  knowl- 
edge of  law,  the  same  judicial  attributes,  the  same 
reasoning,  the  same  sense  of  justice  are  required  in  the 
trial  of  both  cases. 

SOME    OF    THE    PENALTIES    PRESCRIBED 

The  Kansas  legislature,  in  its  effort  to  protect  the 
public  against  the  evils  of  industrial  warfare,  in  Section 
3b  of  the  Industrial  Law,  declares  that  employees  as 
well  as  employers,  workers  as  well  as  investors,  in  the 
essential  industries  shall  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of 
the  Industrial  Act.  In  Section  6  of  the  Act  tlie  leg- 
islature declares  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  public  peace, 
health  and  general  welfare  that  these  industries  shall 
be  operated  with  reasonable  continuity  and  efficiency, 
and  that,  therefore,  no  person,  firm,  corporation,  or 
association  of  persons  shall  in  any  manner  willfully 
hinder,  delay,  limit  or  suspend  such  continuous  and 
efficient  operation  for  the  purpose  of  evading  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Act.  In  Section  17,  the  legislature  de- 
clares it  to  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  firm  or  cor- 
poration, or  for  any  association  of  persons  to  hinder, 
delay,  limit,  or  suspend  such  continuous  and  efficient 
operations.  Section  17  also  provides  that  there  shall 
be  no  restriction  upon  the  right  of  any  individual  to 
quit  his  employment  at  any  time,  but  specifically  pro- 
hibits any  person  from  conspiring  with,  or  inducing. 


74  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

Others  to  quit  their  employment  for  the  purpose  of 
hindering,  delaying,  interfering  with,  or  suspending  the 
operations  of  any  such  industries;  and  it  further  spe- 
cifically prohibits  picketing,  or  intimidation  by  threats 
or  abuse,  with  the  intent  to  induce  others  to  quit  their 
employment  or  to  keep  them  from  accepting  employ- 
ment or  from  remaining  in  the  employ  of  any  of  the 
industries  named. 

INDUSTRIAL  WRONGS  AND  THEIR  REMEDIES 

These  restrictions  upon  labor  have  been  denounced 
in  unmeasured  terms  by  a  number  of  the  governing 
officials  of  labor  organizations.  The  condemnation  of 
the  Kansas  Industrial  Law  by  these  representatives  of 
labor  might  be  fully  justified  if  the  law  had  stopped 
after  making  these  restrictions  and  had  given  in  com- 
pensation therefor  no  remedial  rights.  Alongside  of 
these  restrictive  measures  should  be  noted  the  fact  that 
there  has  been  created  an  impartial  tribunal  into  which 
labor  may  go  at  any  time  without  cost  and  may  have 
its  grievances  and  controversies  with  employers  inves- 
tigated and  adjudicated.  The  Kansas  law  substitutes 
for  the  strike,  the  boycott,  duress,  intimidation  and  vio- 
lence in  industrial  disputes,  the  orderly  processes  of  a 
civil  tribunal.  The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  has 
the  power  and  jurisdiction  to  summon  all  necessary 
parties  before  it,  to  take  the  testimony  of  witnesses,  to 
investigate  all  conditions  affecting  the  industr}^,  and 
when  necessary  in  the  protection  of  the  public  interest 
to  order  such  changes  as  may  be  necessary  in  the  mat- 
ter of  working  and  living  conditions,  hours  of  labor. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  75 

rules  and  practices,  and  a  reasonable  minimum  wage  or 
standard  of  wages. ^^ 

At  this  point  w^e  meet  violent  opposition  from  both 
organizations, — the  organized  employers  and  the  or- 
ganized workers, — who  in  unison  declare  that  no  hu- 
man tribunal  can  fix  a  wage  at  which  labor  must  work 
or  which  the  employer  must  pay,  and  labor  adds  that  no 
human  tribunal  can  prohibit  workers  from  striking  in 
order  to  procure  justice  from  their  employers.  Yet 
that,  in  substance  and  within  certain  limitations,  is 
what  we  are  undertaking  to  do  in  Kansas.  We  are  not 
without  judicial  authority  although  it  must  be  admitted 
that  we  have  little  enough  precedent  to  guide  us. 
In  Re  Debs,  158  U.  S.  564,  39  Law  Ed.  1092, 
Justice  Brewer  delivered  the  opinion  and  with  his 
usual  clarity  of  thought  and  felicity  of  expression 
stated  the  principles  of  law  which  very  largely  influ- 
enced and  guided  in  the  framing  of  the  Kansas  Indus- 
trial Act.  The  power  of  Congress  to  regulate  inter- 
state and  foreign  commerce  and  commerce  with  the  In- 
dian tribes  is  a  part  of  the  police  power  which  formerly 
belonged  to  the  states  but  which,  upon  the  adoption  of 
the  Federal  Constitution,  was  surrendered  to  the  Na- 
tional government.  Therefore,  there  seems  to  be  a 
close  analogy  between  the  Debs  case  and  cases  which 
might  arise  under  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act.  Justice 
Brewer  in  the  opinion  makes  the  following  statement : 

"The  entire  strength  of  the  nation  may  be  used  to 
enforce  in  any  part  of  the  land  the  full  and  free  exer- 
cise of  all  national  powers  and  the  security  of  all  rights 
entrusted  by  the  Constitution  to  its  care.     The  strong 

"  Sections  7  and  8,  Kansas  Industrial  Law. 


76  I.  A  p.  O  R     AND     D  !•:  M  O  C  R  A  C  Y 

arm  of  the  national  government  may  be  put  forth  to 
brush  away  all  obstructions  to  the  freedom  of  inter- 
state commerce  or  the  transportation  of  the  mails.  If 
the  emergency  arises,  the  army  of  the  nation  and  all  its 
militia  are  at  the  service  of  the  nation  to  compel  obedi- 
ence to  its  laws." 

The  learned  justice  in  the  Debs  case  was  considering 
the  question  of  a  great  strike  among-  the  employees  of 
the  railroads  entering  Chicago.  In  another  place  in 
the  opinion  he  uses  this  expression : 

"The  forcible  interference  with  that  commerce:  the 
attempted  exercise  by  individuals  of  pozvers  belonging 
only  to  government,  and  the  threatened  continuance  of 
such  invasions  of  public  right,  presented  a  condition  of 
affairs  which  called  for  the  fullest  exercise  of  all  the 
powers  of  the  courts."     (The  italics  are  ours.) 

In  another  part  of  the  opinion  Justice  Brewer  says : 

"Doubtless,  it  is  within  the  competency  of  Congress 
to  prescribe  by  legislation  that  any  interferences  with 
these  matters  shall  be  offenses  against  the  United  States, 
and  prosecuted  and  punished  by  indictment  in  the 
proper  courts."  ^°    (The  italics  are  ours.) 

Again,  in  the  case  of  Wilson  vs.  New  (243  U.  S.  331, 
61  Law  Ed.  755)  the  question  of  the  rights  of  the  pub- 
lic, the  authority  of  the  government,  and  the  rights  and 
duties  of  employers  and  employees  were  considered.  In 
Wilson  z's.  New  the  court  considered  the  constitutional- 
ity of  the  Adamson  Law,  so-called.   This  case  was  also 

^  See  also  Duplex  Printing  Co.  v.  Deering,  254  U.  S.  443,  65 
Law  Ed.  176. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  7/ 

carefully  studied  in  the  framing  of  the  Kansas  Indus- 
trial Act.  It  is  claimed  that  in  everything,  except  pos- 
sibly its  penal  sections,  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act  is 
strictly  within  the  principles  of  law  laid  down  by  Chief 
Justice  White  in  the  prevailing  opinion  in  Wilson  vs. 
New.  In  that  case  the  power  of  Congress  tc  enact  such 
legislation  was  challenged.  But  the  prevailing  opinion 
unmistakably  upholds  such  power  when  the  country 
may  be  confronted  with  an  emergency  which  threatens 
the  public.     In  the  prevailing  opinion  it  is  stated : 


"Further  yet,  what  benefits  would  flow  to  society  by 
recognizing  the  right  because  of  the  public  interest  to 
regulate  the  relation  of  employer  and  employee  and  of 
the  employees  among  themselves,  and  to  give  to  the  lat- 
ter peculiar  and  special  rights,  safeguarding  their  per- 
sons, protecting  them  in  case  of  accident,  and  giving 
efficient  remedies  for  that  purpose,  if  there  were  no 
power  to  remedy  a  situation  created  by  a  dispute  be- 
tween employers  and  employees  as  to  the  rate  of  wages, 
which,  if  not  remedied,  zvoiild  leave  the  public  helpless, 
the  zvhole  people  ruined  and  all  the  homes  of  the  land 
submitted  to  a  danger  of  the  most  serious  character? 
.  .  .  We  are  of  opinion  that  the  reasons  stated  con- 
clusively establish  that,  from  the  point  of  view  of  in- 
herent power,  the  Act  which  is  before  us  (the  Adamson 
Law)  was  clearly  within  the  legislative  power  of  Con- 
gress to  adopt,  and  that,  in  substance  -and  effect,  it 
amounted  to  an  exertion  of  its  authority  inider  the  cir- 
cumstances disclosed  to  compulsorily  arlntrate  a  dis- 
pute between  the  parties  by  cstablisliing  as  to  the  sub- 
ject matter  of  that  dispute  a  legislative  standard  of 
wages  operative  and  binding  as  a  matter  of  law  upon 
the  parties, — a  power  none  the  less  efficaciously  exerted 
because  exercised  by  direct  legislative  act  instead  of  by 
the  enactment  of  other  and  appropriate  means  provid- 


78  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

ing  for  the  bringing  about  of  such  results."     (The  ital- 
ics are  ours.) 

It  is  suggested  that  a  study  of  those  portions  of  the 
brief  of  SoHcitor  General  Davis  and  others  in  Wilson 
vs.  New,  set  out  in  U.  S,  Supreme  Court  Rep.  6i  Law- 
Ed.  beginning  on  page  756  will  greatly  assist  persons 
who  desire  to  make  a  thorough  and  technical  study  of 
the  questions  discussed  in  the  opinion.  There  seems  to 
be  significance  in  the  language  used  by  the  Chief  Jus- 
tice above  quoted :  "Other  and  appropriate  means  pro- 
viding for  the  bringing  about  of  such  results."  Read 
in  connection  with  the  context,  these  words  seem  to 
point  to  the  establishment  by  legislative  act  of  some 
tribunal  clothed  with  authority  to  adjust  and  regulate 
such  conditions  as  they  might  occur  from  time  to  time. 
The  present  Federal  railroad  labor  board  is  at  least 
somewhat  in  line  with  the  suggestion  of  the  Chief 
Justice. 

SOME  OBSERVATIONS  UPON  "DUE  PROCESS  OF  LAW" 

A  strong  protest  is  made  by  some  labor  leaders 
against  the  provisions  of  Section  17  of  the  Act,  which 
prohibits  conspiracy,  picketing  or  threats  to  prevent 
others  from  entering  the  employment  of  the  essential 
industries  or  from  remaining  in  that  employment.  The 
old  argument  in  favor  of  the  "peaceful  picket"  and 
the  right  to  persuade  others  to  cease  work  is  used. 
The  Kansas  Act  does  not  prohibit  picketing  except  in 
the  essential  industries  named  in  the  law.  The  picket- 
ing of  a  mercantile  establishment  would  not  be  a  viola- 
tion of  the  Act.     Is  the  picketing  of  any  kind  of  a 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  79 

business  permissible  under  the  general  laws  of  the 
land  ?  There  is  a  division  among  the  courts  upon  this 
proposition,  but  the  tendency  of  the  times  seems  to  be 
toward  the  outlawing  of  the  picket.  It  is  undoubtedly 
a  disturbance  of  the  peace  of  the  party  picketed.  If 
persisted  in  it  becomes  a  nuisance  not  only  to  the  party 
directly  affected  but  to  the  public.  Assume  that  the 
displeasure  of  organized  labor  should  fall  upon  the 
owner  of  a  jewelry  store.  He  may  be  a  good  citizen. 
He  pays  his  taxes.  He  obeys  the  laws  of  the  land.  He 
has  never  been  arrested.  He  may  be  a  man  who  began 
life  as  a  worker  at  the  bench  in  the  repair  department 
of  the  very  business  of  which  he  is  now  the  owner. 
He  may  have  acquired  the  ownership  by  long  years  of 
painstaking  industry,  frugality  and  honest  dealing. 
But  in  some  way  he  has  failed  to  meet  the  demands 
made  upon  him  by  the  "organization."  He  is  not  given 
his  day  in  court.  He  is  not  taken  before  the  officers 
of  the  law  and  allowed  to  explain  his  side  of  the  con- 
troversy. He  is  not  permitted  to  produce  witnesses  nor 
to  have  counsel.  His  civil  rights  are  denied.  He  is 
condemned  by  a  private  tribunal  not  recognized  by  our 
constitution  or  our  laws.  His  place  of  business  is 
picketed  by  persons  who  proclaim,  either  by  printed 
signs  or  by  vocal  sounds,  the  anathema  of  labor 
against  him.  They  seek  to  intimidate  his  customers, 
or  at  least  to  influence  them  against  his  business.  The 
"good-will"  of  his  business,  recognized  by  the  courts 
as  a  valuable  property  in  itself,  may  be  destroyed  and 
his  financial  loss  may  be  as  great  as  would  have  re- 
sulted from  the  burning  of  his  building  by  an  incendi- 
ary.     When   directed   against  any   of   the   industries 


8o  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

named  in  the  Kansas  act,  the  picket  becomes  a  public 
menace  if  it  threatens  to  limit  or  suspend  the  produc- 
tion or  transportation  of  the  necessaries  of  life.  Where 
is  "due  process  of  law"  which  organized  labor  so  loudly 
demands  in  injunction  cases  in  courts? 

The  mere  statement  of  this  case  is  its  own  argument. 
The  owner  of  that  business  has  rights  which  have  ar- 
bitrarily been  taken  away  from  him,  not  by  govern- 
ment but  by  an  organization  which  claims  the  right  to 
exercise  a  power  which  belongs  "only  to  government." 
The  people  have  tolerated  the  picket  and  other  arbi- 
trary means  resorted  to  by  labor,  no  doubt  partly  be- 
cause of  inertia,  but  also  because  of  a  feeling  that  labor 
has  not  been  given  a  square  deal.  There  is  an  element 
of  justice  in  the  latter  proposition,  for  labor  has  not 
heretofore  been  given  a  legal  remedy  for  the  wrongs 
which  it  claims  to  have  suffered.  Under  the  Kansas 
Industrial  Act  that  legal  remedy  is  afforded. 

THE  PENAL  SECTIONS  OF  THE  LAW 

The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  has  no  criminal 
jurisdiction.  The  Industrial  Act,  however,  contains 
three  sections  providing  penalties  for  willful  interfer- 
ence with  the  court's  jurisdiction  or  defiance  of  its  au- 
thority. Section  1 5  forbids  any  employer  to  discharge 
or  to  in  any  way  discriminate  against  any  employee 
because  of  the  fact  that  such  employee  may  testify  as  a 
witness  before  the  court  of  Industrial  Relations  in 
matters  of  controversy  between  employer  and  em- 
ployees, or  may  initiate  proceedings,  or  may  be  in  any 
■way  instrumental  in  bringing  such  controversy  to  the 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  8l 

attention  of  the  Court.  Complaint  is  made  that  this 
section  restricts  the  right  of  the  employer  to  employ 
whom  he  pleases  and  to  discharge  when  he  pleases.  It 
has  been  stated  that  the  section  is  invalid  under  the 
principles  laid  down  in  the  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  in  the  case  of  Coppage  vs. 
Kansas.-^  It  is  the  contention  of  the  friends  of  the 
law  that  the  principles  stated  in  that  case  do  not  apply, 
that  the  restrictions  placed  upon  the  discharge  of  em- 
ployees by  Section  15  of  the  Industrial  Act  are  no 
infringement  upon  the  liberty  of  contract,  but  are  pure- 
ly for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  jurisdiction  and 
processes  of  the  court.  The  importance  of  the  section 
is  apparent.  If  it  be  within  the  power  of  the  employer 
to  peremptorily  discharge  from  his  employment  or  to 
otherwise  discriminate  against  an  employee  who  may 
be  instrumental  in  bringing  proceedings  before  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  a  sort  of  terrorism  would 
prevail  in  industry  and  employees  could  not  be  found 
who  w^ould  have  the  temerity  to  bring  matters  to  the 
attention  of  the  Industrial  Court  or  even  to  testify 
freely  and  truthfully  in  matters  brought  upon  the 
Court's  initiative.  Such  a  situation  would  practically 
defeat  the  law.  Section  15  applies  to  proceedings  in 
the  Industrial  Court  in  very  much  the  same  w'ay  as 
laws  forbidding  tampering  with  or  intimidating  wit- 
nesses or  destroying  or  concealing  evidence  in  matters 
before  courts  of  general  jurisdiction. 

Section  18  of  the  law  declares  any  person  willfully 
violating  the  provisions  of  the  Industrial  Act  or  any 
valid  order  of  the  court  of  Industrial  Relations  guilty 

"236  U.  S.  I,  59  Law  Ed.  441. 


82  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

of  a  misdemeanor.  This  applies  to  employees  and 
others  a  rule  not  essentially  different  from  the  rule 
applying  to  the  employers  under  Section  15  and  the 
same  reasons  exist  for  the  rule. 

By  Section  19,  it  is  declared  that  any  officer  of  any 
corporation  engaged  in  the  essential  industries  or  any 
officer  of  any  labor  union  or  association  of  persons  en- 
gaged as  workers  therein,  or  any  employer  of  labor 
coming  within  the  provisions  of  the  act  "who  shall 
willfully  use  the  power  or  authority  or  influence  inci- 
dent to  his  official  position,  or  to  his  position  as  an  em- 
ployer of  others  and  by  such  means  shall  intentionally 
influence,  impel,  or  compel  any  other  persons  to  violate 
any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  any  valid  order 
of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  shall  be  deemed 
guilty  of  a  felony  ..."  This  section  has  been  vio- 
lently attacked  by  certain  classes  of  labor  officials. 
Under  Section  3448,  General  Statutes  of  Kansas,  191 5, 
it  is  provided  that  "every  person  who  in  the  night-time 
shall  steal,  take,  or  carry  away  any  domestic  fowls, 
etc.,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  grand  larceny."  If  the 
ordinary  chicken  thief  can  be  punished  for  grand  lar- 
ceny, what  should  be  done  with  a  labor  official  or  an 
officer  of  a  corporation  who  will  use  his  power  and 
authority,  through  the  lockout  or  the  strike,  to  paralyze 
business,  throw  thousands  out  of  employment,  and  pen- 
alize the  general  public  by  limiting  or  suspending  the 
production  of  life's  necessities?  If  the  purloiner  of  a 
hen  worth  fifty  cents  may  be  sent  to  the  penitentiary, 
what  ought  to  be  done  with  a  labor  union  official  who 
by  his  autocratic  power  refuses  men  the  right  to  mine 
enough  coal  to  warm  the  sick  in  a  hospital?    It  is  not 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  83 

a  debatable  question.  The  penal  features  of  the  indus- 
trial law  are  moderate  in  their  spirit  and  intent  and 
are  necessary  in  the  protection  of  the  public  and  in  the 
promotion  of  the  general  welfare. 

THE  NATURE  OF  THE  TRIBUNAL 

The  Kansas  Industrial  Act  creates  "a  tribunal  to  be 
known  as  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations."  Excep- 
tions have  been  taken  to  the  use  of  the  word  "court" 
by  some  lawyers  and  it  has  been  frequently  pointed  out 
that  the  tribunal  is  not  a  court  but  a  commission  or 
board  created  by  the  legislature  for  the  purpose  of  ad- 
ministering the  industrial  law.  As  a  technical  propo- 
sition the  critics  are,  no  doubt,  correct,  but  the  legis- 
lature was  duly  informed  on  that  point  at  the  time  of 
the  passage  of  the  act.  In  the  public  forum  and  dis- 
cussion, the  opponents  of  the  bill  called  attention  to 
this  point  in  very  much  the  same  way  that  critics  of 
the  law  have  since  done.  One  of  the  advocates  of  the 
measure  who  addressed  the  legislature  in  favor  of  the 
bill  discussed  the  same  question  in  his  address  and 
stated  very  plainly  the  true  nature  of  the  tribunal.  It 
was  agreed  that  the  proposed  tribunal  would  not  be 
and  could  not  be  a  court  in  the  technical  sense,  but  all 
admitted  that  it  should  not  be  called  a  board  or  com- 
mission. 

Among  the  numerous  definitions  of  the  word  "court" 
given  in  Webster's  International  Dictionary  are  the  fol- 
lowing : 

"All  persons  duly  assembled  under  authority  of  law 
for  the  administration  of  justice  whether  specifically 
appointed   to   exercise   only   judicial  powers,   as   most 


§4  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

modern  courts,  or  coml)ine(l  with  legislative  powers  as 
often  formerly  and  still  in  some  cases  as  that  of  the 
British  Parliament,  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts, 
etc. ;  an  official  assembly  legally  met  together  for  the 
transaction  of  judicial  business;  a  judge  or  judges  sit- 
ting for  the  hearing  or  trial  of  causes ;  a  tribunal  estab- 
lished for  the  administration  of  justice." 

The  tribunal  established  by  the  Kansas  Industrial 
Act  is  a  "tribunal  established  for  the  administration  of 
justice,"  but  it  has  no  power  to  punish  for  contempt, 
no  power  to  issue  an  execution,  no  power  to  enforce  its 
own  judgments.  If  a  witness  ignores  a  subpoena  is- 
sued by  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  that  court 
is  authorized  by  statute  to  "take  proper  proceedings  in 
any  court  of  competent  jurisdiction  to  compel  obedi- 
ence to  such  summons  or  subpoena.--  In  case  of  the 
failure  or  refusal  of  either  party  to  obey  and  be  gov- 
erned by  an  order  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations, 
proceedings  are  to  be  brought  in  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  state  of  Kansas  to  compel  obedience  thereto. 
\  It  is  this  lack  of  judicial  power  which  has  caused 
soTme  technically  minded  lawyers  to  object  to  the  use  of 
the  word  "court"  in  this  connection.  Under  the  pres- 
ent constitution  of  the  state  of  Kansas,  the  powers 
•which  were  absolutely  necessary  to  the  administration 
of  the  Industrial  Act  could  not  be  combined  with  the 
judicial  powers  above  stated.  Under  the  Kansas  con- 
stitution the  three  departments  of  government  are  dis- 
tinctly separated, — executive,  legislative,  and  judicial. 
More  than  twenty  years  ago  an  effort  was  made  by  the 
governor  and  legislature  to  create  a  body  known  as  the 

"Section  ii,  Kansas  Industrial  Act. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  85 

"court  of  visitation,"  which  under  the  statute  was 
authorized  to  exercise  judicial  powers  and  functions, 
and  also  to  act  in  a  legislative  and  executive  capacity. 
The  Supreme  Court  declared  the  law  unconstitu- 
tional. In  the  framing  of  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act 
care  was  exercised  to  avoid  that  mistake.  In  the  fixing 
of  a  scale  of  wages,  and  establishing  rules  concern- 
ing working  hours  and  working  conditions,  the  Court 
of  Industrial  Relations  is  providing  for  the  future  and 
is  really  exercising  legislative  rather  than  judicial  func- 
tions. Experience  may  prove  it  necessary  to  adopt  an 
amendment  to  the  Kansas  constitution  permitting  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  to  exercise  both  judicial 
and  legislative  functions. 

The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  however,  in  the 
performance  of  its  duties  must  at  all  times  be  invested 
with  judicial  attributes  of  a  very  high  order.  It  has 
state-wide  jurisdiction.  The  subject  matter  of  the 
jurisdiction  affects  every  part  of  the  state  and  every 
citizen  within  the  state.  It  has  to  do  with  public  peace, 
the  public  health,  and  the  general  welfare.  It  affects 
the  production  and  distribution  of  the  prime  necessities 
of  life.  It  affects  the  health  and  happiness  of  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  citizens  engaged  as  workers  in 
the  various  industries  named  in  the  Act.  It  affects  vast 
investments  of  capital.  Its  activities  may  powerfully 
influence  the  industrial  development  of  the  state.  It 
has  jurisdiction  of  personal  and  property  rights  as  im- 
portant as,  if  not  more  important  than,  homestead  and 
exemption  rights.  Such  matters  in  courts  of  general 
jurisdiction  would  be  assigned  to  the  equity  side.  The 
members  of  this  tribunal  must  at  all  times  preserve  a 


86  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

judicial  attitude  of  mind  and  approach  every  question 
in  a  spirit  of  justice.  The  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions in  the  trial  of  cases  is  required  by  statute  to  ob- 
serve "the  rules  of  evidence  as  recognized  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  state  of  Kansas  in  original  proceed- 
ings therein."  The  court  is  constantly  called  upon  to 
rule  as  to  the  admissibility  of  evidence  and  to  pass  upon 
the  objections  of  counsel,  to  overrule  or  sustain  mo- 
tions, and  to  otherwise  conduct  the  proceedings  of  the 
trial.  After  the  testimony  is  taken,  the  statute  re- 
quires that  it  be  transcribed  in  duplicate,  one  copy  to  be 
retained  among  the  permanent  records  of  the  Court  of 
Industrial  Relations  and  the  other  to  be  used  in  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  state  in  case  either  party  desires 
a  review  by  that  court.  It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that 
the  proceedings  in  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations 
are  practically  identical  with  the  proceedings  in  the 
trial  courts  of  general  jurisdiction.  After  the  trial  of 
the  case,  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  makes  its 
findings  of  fact,  under  Section  7  of  the  Act.  If  under 
the  facts  an  order  is  deemed  proper,  the  court  then 
enters  its  conclusions  of  law  and  makes  its  order  in  the 
case,  as  provided  by  Section  8  of  the  Act.  Up  to  this 
point,  the  work  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations 
has  been  very  similar  to  the  proceedings  in  a  chancery 
court  or  in  a  federal  court  on  the  equity  side.  In  the 
court  of  chancery  and  in  the  equity  court,  the  presid- 
ing judge  often  appoints  a  master  in  chancery  or  a 
commissioner  to  take  the  testimony.  In  such  a  case 
the  master  or  the  commissioner  would  perform  the 
same  duties  that  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  does 
in  the  trial  of  every  case.    The  Industrial  Act  provides 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  87 

that  either  party  dissatisfied  with  the  order  made  by  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  may  bring  proceedings 
in  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  nature  of  mandamus 
where  a  review  of  the  order  and  the  proceedings  in  the 
Industrial  Court  may  be  had.  In  such  a  case  as  that, 
the  Industrial  Court's  entire  record  has  practically  the 
same  value  in  the  Supreme  Court  as  would  the  report  of 
a  commissioner  or  master  in  chancery.  If  neither 
party  desires  a  review  by  the  Supreme  Court,  the  order 
made  by  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  stands  and 
is  enforcible.  If  either  party  refuses  to  obey  the  order 
of  the  Industrial  Court,  the  court  itself  may  apply  to 
the  Supreme  Court  for  a  writ  of  mandamus  to  compel 
obedience  to  the  order. 

In  the  performance  of  its  duties,  the  Court  of  Indus- 
trial Relations  is  constantly  called  upon  to  decide  im- 
portant questions  of  law,  some  of  which  are  novel.  It 
is  a  pioneer  proposition.  The  legislature  of  the  state 
of  Kansas  in  the  Industrial  Act  gave  the  Court  an 
outline,  but  the  Industrial  Law  in  its  completeness  must 
be  written  by  the  court  in  its  opinions  and  orders  in 
accordance  with  that/outline,  in  harmony  with  the  con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  and  the  constitution  of 
the  state  of  Kansas,  in  consonance  with  established 
principles  of  law  and  in  the  light  of  the  experience  of 
mankind  in  the  centuries  past.  Only  the  shallow  mind- 
ed will  consider  such  duties  easy  of  performance.  The 
tribunal  created  by  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act  is  not  a 
court  of  general  jurisdiction.  It  is  not  a  court  in  the 
sense  that  the  word  "court"  might  be  used  by  pedants. 
It  is  a  new  type  of  court, — an  industrial  court  having 
jurisdiction  of  problems  which  are  most  vital  to  civili- 


88  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

zation  today  and  upon  the  proper  solution  of  which 
depends  not  only  the  prosperity  and  happiness  of  the 
people  but  also  the  very  existence  of  government  itself. 

There  has  been  some  criticism  of  the  law  because  it 
places  such  tremendous  power  in  the  hands  of  a  body 
composed  of  only  three  men  but  this  criticism  is  un- 
warranted because,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  every  order  of 
the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  is  subject  to  review 
by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  state.  That  court  is  the 
final  authority  upon  all  questions  in  litigation  from  all 
the  inferior  courts  of  the  state.  It  will  be  seen,  there- 
fore, that  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  is  not  an 
ordinary  board  or  commission,  but  is  invested  with 
such  judicial  attributes  as  give  it  an  importance  far 
greater  than  that  of  a  board  or  commission. 

The  name,  however,  is  of  little  consequence  but  the 
character  of  the  tribunal  is  of  tremendous  importance. 
The  work  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  is  such 
that  it  must  be  entirely  free  from  political  influence. 
It  should  be  kept  upon  a  plane  of  honor,  dignity  and 
ability  second  only  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  state. 
Membership  in  this  tribunal  should  not  be  conferred 
upon  men  as  a  reward  for  political  service  or  as  induce- 
ment for  political  services  anticipated.  The  seeker 
after  notoriety,  the  political  manager,  the  chairman  of 
the  state  central  committee,  the  man  who  has  rendered 
political  service,  or  who  may  be  expected  to  render  such 
services  to  the  appointing  officiary  should  not  be  ap- 
pointed, and  public  sentiment  should  make  such  men  in- 
eligible to  appointment.  The  tribunal  should  not  be 
expected  to  consider  the  political  services  or  the  politi- 
cal fortunes  of  any  individual.     No  action  of  the  court 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  89 

should  be  influenced  by  the  probable  effect  it  will  have 
upon  "the  party."  //  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations 
cannot  be  kept  free  from  the  influence  of  politics  and 
of  politicians,  if  it  cannot  be  placed  and  kept  upon  the 
high  plane  of  a  judicial  tribunal,  it  will  fail  and  the 
law  shoidd  be  repealed  before  failure  becomes  disgrace. 
There  is  one  peculiarity  about  this  tribunal, — it  deals 
with  litigants  as  classes.  In  every  other  court  the  liti- 
gants are  individuals.  Labor,  capital,  and  the  general 
public, — these  are  the  three  and  only  litigants  that  ever 
appear  in  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations.  Now,  it  is 
evident  that  it  will  never  be  proper  to  elect  the  members 
of  this  tribunal  by  popular  vote  because  to  do  so  would 
inject  into  every  election  campaign  a  class  issue.  Or- 
ganized labor  would  probably  sacrifice  every  other  place 
on  the  ticket  in  order  to  elect  its  choice  upon  the  Indus- 
trial Court.  Organized  capital  would  bring  every  pos- 
sible influence  to  bear  to  elect  the  opposite  kind  of  a 
man,  and  the  general  public,  unorganized  and  unable 
to  protect  itself,  would  suffer  in  the  results.  The 
method  of  selection  must  be  by  appointment  and  must 
be  free  from  political  influence. 

INVOLUNTARY  SERVITUDE 

A  most  grotesque  argument  is  made  against  the 
Kansas  Industrial  Act, — that  it  imposes  involuntary 
servitude  upon  workers.  The  analysis  of  the  law  here- 
inbefore given  shows  the  fallacy  of  that  statement.  It 
might  be  added,  however,  that  there  is  no  provision  in 
the  Act  to  compel  men  to  work.  The  policy  of  the  law 
is  to  create  economic  conditions  which  will  impel  men 


90  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

to  labor  in  the  essential  industries  for  the  same  reason 
that  capital  might  seek  investment  therein.  Capital 
seeks  investment  where  the  security  is  good  and  the 
return  assured.  This  is  an  economic  law  as  immutable 
as  the  law  of  gravitation.  Labor  will  seek  employment 
where  the  wage  is  fair  and  the  working  conditions 
favorable.  The  Kansas  Industrial  Act  seeks  to  give 
to  labor  a  fair  wage  and  favorable  working  conditions 
and  thus  to  call  to  its  aid  the  economic  law  which  will 
assure  the  essential  industries  at  all  times  labor  of  the 
highest  skill  and  fidelity. 

INVOLUNTARY  IDLENESS 

"Neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude,  except  as 
punishment  for  crime  whereof  the  party  shall  have 
been  duly  convicted,  shall  exist  in  the  United  States  or 
any  place  subject  to  their  jurisdiction."  (Thirteenth 
Amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.) 

It  may  not  be  necessary  to  adopt  another  amendment- 
to  the  Constitution,  but  the  fact  remains  that  involun- 
tary idleness  is  an  evil  almost,  if  not  cjuite,  as  vicious 
as  involuntary  servitude.  A  fair  administration  of  in- 
dustrial justice  would  minimize,  perhaps  wholly  re- 
move, this  evil.  While  radical  leaders  of  labor  are  de- 
nouncing the  Industrial  Law  on  the  ground  that  it  pro- 
vides for  involuntary  servitude,  it  might  be  well  to 
devote  some  attention  to  the  involuntary  idleness  im- 
posed upon  thousands  of  working  people  by  the  strike 
and  the  picket,  aided  by  the  boycott.  To  the  laboring 
man  who  has  a  family  to  support  the  terror  of  the 
strike,  the  picket,  the  boycott  and  other  industrial  dis- 
turbances which  take  away  from  him  his  means  of 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  9I 

livelihood,  is  a  consideration  more  vital  than  the  imaj^- 
inary  problem  of  involuntary  servitude,  so  persistently 
and  falsely  asserted  by  the  radical  labor  leadership.  In- 
voluntary idleness  should  also  be  prohibited  by  the  law 
of  the  land.  A  man  who  is  willing  to  work  is  as  de- 
serving of  the  protection  of  the  law  as  the  man  who 
may  have  forced  upon  him  a  service  not  of  his  own 
choice. 

JUDICIAL    SUPPORT FUNDAMENTALS    OF    INDUSTRIAL 

ACT 

Ample  support  for  the  fundamental  principles  of  the 
Kansas  Industrial  Act  are:  (i)  Sir  Matthew  Hale's 
statement  of  the  public's  interest,  made  two  hundred 
and  sixty  years  ago;  (2)  the  application  of  that  ancient 
principle  to  more  modern  conditions,  by  Chief  Justice 
Waite  in  1877  in  Munn  vs.  People  of  Illinois;  (3)  Jus- 
tice Brewer's  clear  statement,  in  1895,  of  the  law  with 
regard  to  the  power  of  courts  and  legislatures  to  pro- 
tect the  public  and  to  penalize  "the  attempted  exercise 
by  individuals  of  powers  belonging  only  to  govern- 
ment," in  re  Debs;  and  (4)  Chief  Justice  White's 
strong  statement  in  19 16,  upholding  the  right  of  Con- 
gress by  legislation,  in  case  of  a  great  public  emer- 
gency, to  fix  a  permanent  standard  working  day  and 
establish  temporary  wage  regulations  for  employees 
engaged  in  operating  railway  trains  in  interstate  com- 
merce. 

By  the  Industrial  Act  we  are  attempting  such  reg- 
ulation of  all  businesses  which  are  affected  with  a  pub- 
lic interest  as  is  necessary  to  protect  the  public,  as  sug- 
gested by  Sir  Matthew  Hale  and  Chief  Justice  Waitc. 


92  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

In  so  doing  we  are  forbidding  "the  exercise  by  indi- 
viduals of  powers  belonging  only  to  government."  We 
are  making  interference  with  such  businesses  offenses 
against  the  state  to  be  prosecuted  and  punished  in  the 
criminal  courts,  as  suggested  by  Justice  Brewer  in  re 
Debs;  and  we  have  by  this  enactment  provided  "other 
and  appropriate  means  providing  for  the  bringing 
about  of  such  results,"  as  suggested  by  Chief  Justice 
White  in  Wilson  vs.  New. 


PART  THREE 
A  FEW  INTERESTING  INCIDENTS 

"his  majesty,  the  king,"  meets  the  law 

On  the  fifth  of  April,  1920,  a  trifle  more  than  two 
months  after  its  organization,  the  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations  undertook  an  investigation  of  the  coal  min- 
ing industry  in  southeastern  Kansas.  The  investiga- 
tion was  immediately  occasioned  by  complaints  made 
by  coal  miners,  but  was  in  line  with  the  general  policy 
of  the  Court  to  investigate  conditions  which  were  de- 
clared to  have  occasioned  the  strike  of  the  December 
and  January  previous. 

There  were  some  very  interesting  developments  dur- 
ing this  investigation.  The  Industrial  Court  issued  a 
subpoena  for  Alexander  Howat,  president  of  the 
United  Mine  Workers  of  America  District  No.  14,  and 
for  several  of  his  subordinates,  members  of  the  dis- 
trict board.  It  was  the  intention  of  the  Court  to  ques- 
tion these  men  as  to  conditions  which  caused  unrest 
among  the  miners.  Mr.  Howat,  the  same  individual 
who  denied  coal  for  the  general  public  and  refused  to 
permit  a  small  quantity  to  be  mined  for  the  benefit  of  a 
local  hospital  three  months  earlier,  with  his  usual  hos- 
tility to  law  refused  to  obey  the  subpoena.  The  Indus- 
trial Court  applied  to  the  district  court  of  Crawford 

93 


94  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

County  for  an  order  compelling  him  to  attend  and 
testify.  This  order  was  granted  and  Mr.  Howat  and 
his  subordinates  refused  to  obey  the  order  of  the  dis- 
trict court.  They  were  cited  for  contempt  of  the  order 
and  were  tried  before  District  Judge  Andrew  J.  Cur- 
ran  upon  that  charge. 

All  the  miners  in  the  district  took  a  vacation  and 
the  city  of  Pittsburg  was  full  of  men  who  had  come 
to  town  to  see  how  the  new  instrumentality  of  the  law 
would  work.  There  is  no  denying  the  fact  that  a  large 
majority  of  the  miners  themselves  were  very  loyal  to 
Mr.  Howat.  The  evidence  shows  that  of  the  10,000 
or  12,000  miners  in  that  district  fewer  than  500  can 
claim  English  as  their  mother  tongue.  The  others  are 
men  brought  from  southern  Europe  by  the  coal  opera- 
tors fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago.  They  are  principally 
Italians,  Sicilians,  Sardinians,  Poles,  and  Slavs.  At 
Girard,  Crawford  County,  Kansas,  for  many  years  was 
published  a  weekly  paper  styled  The  Appeal  to  Rea- 
son,, a  socialist  organ.  The  paper  was  afterward  sup- 
pressed by  the  United  States  Government.  Its  editor 
was  imprisoned  and  its  owner  committed  suicide. 
When  these  foreigners  were  first  brought  to  this  dis- 
trict, socialism  was  rampant  and  they  fell  under  its 
influence.  Mr.  Howat's  style  of  oratory  and  method 
of  procedure  seem  to  appeal  to  them.  For  many  years 
this  section  of  Kansas  has  been  under  the  more  or  less 
dominating  influence  of  this  man  who  has  been  called 
"The  Miners'  King."  At  one  time  the  court  house  of 
Crawford  County  was  filled  with  county  officers  of  the 
socialist  faith.  It  was  under  such  conditions  that 
Andrew  J.  Curran,  a  young  lawyer,  born  and  bred  in 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  95 

that  locality,  was  nominated  by  the  democrats  for  dis- 
trict judge.  The  socialists  had  a  candidate  for  the 
same  position  who  had  been  engaged  in  business  as 
keeper  of  a  livery  stable  for  many  years.  The  repub- 
licans supported  Andrew  J.  Curran  for  that  position. 
It  was  a  notable  campaign.  Among  other  peculiar  sit- 
uations developed  was  the  fact  that  the  leading  Catholic 
priest  of  the  district  and  the  pastor  of  the  First  ^leth- 
odist  Episcopal  Church  of  Pittsburg  campaigned  the 
county  together,  urging  the  election  of  Andrew  J.  Cur- 
ran for  district  judge.     He  was  elected. 

It  was  before  Judge  Curran  that  Alexander  Howat 
w'as  called  to  have  his  first  experience  with  the  Kansas 
Industrial  Law.  It  was  a  most  dramatic  scene  in  the 
court  room  when  the  court  proceeded  to  pass  sentence. 
The  room  was  literally  packed.  It  was  an  interesting 
sight.  The  faces  in  the  audience  were  nearly  all  for- 
eign faces.  Sicilians  and  Italians  seemed  to  predomi- 
nate. There  was  a  look  of  intense  interest  upon  each 
face.  It  was  a  cloudy  look.  It  was  the  look  of  men 
who  believed  they  had  tremendous  interests  involved 
in  the  proceedings  and  were  doubtful  as  to  the  result. 
There  was  a  brief  silence  in  the  crowded  court  room. 
The  coolest  man  in  the  room  and  the  most  unconcerned 
was  the  district  judge.  He  looked  over  the  top  of  the 
desk  before  him  toward  Howat  who  was  seated  beside 
the  undersherifif.  Speaking  deliberately  in  a  clear  well 
modulated  voice,  he  said,  "Alexander  Howat,  stand 
up."  Howat  stood  up.  A  look  of  mild  surprise  swept 
over  the  faces  in  the  court  room.  The  judge  continued, 
"Alexander  Howat,  it  is  the  judgment  and  sentence  of 
the  Court  that  you  be  confined  in  tlie  county  jail  of 


96  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

Crawford  County  until  such  time  as  you  consent  to  be 
sworn  and  to  testify  in  the  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions. Sit  down."  A  look  of  amazement  swept  over 
the  faces  back  of  the  railing  as  Howat  sat  down.  A 
look  of  relief  came  over  the  face  of  the  under  sheriff 
and  others  inside  the  railing.  The  judge's  face  was 
immobile  and  he  proceeded  in  the  same  fashion  to  sen- 
tence each  of  the  others.  The  court  room  still  remained 
packed  with  standing  men  when  the  undersheriff,  a 
young,  live,  clean-shaven  chap  had  the  "prisoners" 
stand  up  and  commanded  the  crowd,  "Make  way  down 
the  center  aisle  there."  The  men  began  silently  and 
sullenly  to  move  out.  Judge  Curran  announced  a  re- 
cess of  the  court  until  two  p.  m.,  picked  up  his  papers 
and  walked  down  through  the  crowd  to  his  chambers 
without  the  least  sign  that  he  regarded  the  occasion  as 
anything  out  of  the  ordinary.  There  were  several  of 
the  judge's  friends  present  who  were  very  fearful  that 
violence  might  be  attempted  in  case  the  "miners'  king" 
should  be  sentenced  to  jail.  With  Andrew  J.  Curran 
it  was  a  mere  part  of  the  day's  work.  Of  all  men 
connected  from  first  to  last  with  the  enactment  of  the 
Kansas  Industrial  Law  or  with  its  administration  since 
its  enactment,  first  honor  should  be  given  to  Andrew 
J.  Curran,  who  has  lived  his  life  among  these  people, 
who  must  continue  to  live  among  them,  who  was  un- 
moved by  personal  fear  or  political  policy.  He  did  his 
duty  simply  under  his  oath  of  office  without  reference 
to  any  other  consideration.  If  there  had  been  sitting 
upon  that  district  bench  in  Crawford  County,  Kansas, 
on  that  day,  a  petty  politician,  a  weak  man,  a  man  of 
any  other  type,  the  first  year  of  the  administration  of 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  97 

the  Kansas  Industrial  Law  might  have  been  a  very- 
different  story. 

THE    OCCASION    OF   THE   FIRST   UNLAWFUL   STRIKE 

February  16,  1921,  the  District  Board  of  District 
No.  14  United  Mine  Workers  of  America  called  a 
strike  in  two  little  mines.  Two  hundred  miners  quit 
w^ork.  The  pretended  cause  of  the  strike  was  the  fail- 
ure of  a  mining  company  to  pay  a  sum  of  about  two 
hundred  dollars  claimed  as  back  pay  by  a  young  miner. 
The  claim  was  founded  upon  a  provision  of  the  con- 
tract which  required  the  mining  company  to  advance 
the  pay  of  young  miners  on  their  arrival  at  the  age  of 
nineteen  years.  A  young  man  named  Mishmash 
claimed  to  be  entitled  to  the  advance  as  of  the  date 
August  31,  19 1 7.  The  superintendent  had  some  doubt 
about  the  matter  and  went  to  the  young  man's  mother 
to  inquire.  The  mother  showed  the  superintendent  an 
entry  in  a  Bible  giving  the  date  of  birth  as  August  31, 
1899.  At  the  superintendent's  request  she  also  signed 
a  written  statement  to  the  same  effect.  Later,  the 
miners'  officials  took  the  matter  up  and  it  was  dis- 
covered that  there  were  two  entries  in  that  Bible, — 
one  showed  the  date  to  be  August  31,  1898  and  the 
other  August  31,  1899.  The  school  records  were  hope- 
lessly confused,  the  mother  made  a  statement  each  way 
and  the  matter  was  apparently  dropped  by  both  sides. 
The  only  question  in  the  case  was  the  date  of  the  boy's 
birth.  The  boy's  mother  was  a  widow  and  had  moved 
out  of  the  district  with  her  family.  On  February  16, 
1 92 1,  the  miners'  district  board  suddenly  determined 
to  "get  justice  for  the  poor  widow"  by  calling  a  strike. 


98  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

One  of  the  members  of  the  District  Board  refused  to 
vote  for  the  strike,  but  the  two  hundred  men  quit  work 
at  a  cost  to  them  of  more  than  $12,000  in  wages  and 
the  miners'  officials  for  calhng-  the  unlawful  strike  were 
sentenced  to  serve  one  year  in  the  county  jail,  by  the 
District  Court. 

After  the  contempt  proceedings  were  concluded,  the 
Industrial  Court  proceeded  to  investigate  the  cause  of 
the  strike.  The  family,  or  the  family  records  were 
unavailable.  An  inspector  for  the  Court  searched  the 
neighborhood  and  found  a  neighbor  woman  who  was 
present  at  the  time  of  the  boy's  birth  but  testified  she 
did  not  know  the  date.  The  old  Austrian  who  acted 
as  godfather  at  the  christening  did  not  remember  the 
date,  but  he  did  recall  that  the  Austrians  present  were 
somewhat  excited  over  the  news  that  "Franz-Joseph's 
woman  had  been  murdered  the  day  before  and  wished  it 
had  been  the  old  man."  Upon  the  completion  of  the 
aged  Austrian's  testimony,  court  recessed  to  allow  the 
clerk  to  repair  to  the  city  library  and  ascertain,  if  pos- 
sible, the  date  of  the  assassination  of  the  Empress  of 
Austria.  The  clerk  soon  returned  with  a  volume  of 
the  Encyclopedia  Britannica  from  which  it  was  shown 
that  the  Empress  was  assassinated  in  Geneva,  Septem- 
ber 10,  1898. 

This  evidence  settled  the  issue.  The  date  of  the 
birth  was  August  31,  1898.  The  mining  company 
owed  the  money.  The  Industrial  Court  directed  the 
mining  company  to  deposit  the  amount  with  the  clerk 
of  the  District  Court  to  be  paid  to  the  boy  as  soon  as 
he  could  be  located.  The  strike  was  ended  and  the 
men  returned  to  work. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  99 

The  "backpay"  was  the  pretended  cause  of  that 
strike.  But  why  did  not  the  District  Board  procure 
the  conclusive  evidence  which  was  so  easy  of  access? 
The  miners  with  their  intimate  knowledge  of  the  peo- 
ple and  the  circumstances  could  surely  have  found  this 
evidence.  It  required  one-half  day  for  the  agent  of 
the  Industrial  Court  to  do  the  work.  Some  light  may 
be  thrown  upon  this  situation  by  a  few  answers  to 
cjuestions  propounded  to  Mr.  Howat  on  the  trial  of 
the  contempt  charges : 

"Q.  Well,  don't  you  know  that  if  this  boy  had  a 
claim  for  wages  under  a  contract  that  you  could  re- 
cover it  in  court.  A.  No;  I  didn't  know  it.  We  never 
have  settled  any  cases  that  way. 

"Q.  You  think  the  boy  couldn't  collect  the  money 
in  the  courts?  A.  I  couldn't  say  whether  he  could  or 
not.  I  never  tried  it,  and,  anyway,  we  have  a  contract 
which  provides  for  it  and  we  wasn't  obliged  to  go  to 
court. 

"Q.  You  don't  go  into  court ?  A.  No,  sir;  neither 
here  nor  in  the  other  districts. 

"Q.  You  didn't  read  the  injunction?  A.  No; 
never  did. 

"Q.  You  don't  recognize  courts  in  the  matter  of 
settlement  for  wages?  A.  No,  sir;  we  have  a  contract 
that  covers  that. 

"Q.  You  don't  recognize  that  contracts  are  made  to 
be  enforced  in  courts,  then?    A.    No,  sir." 

TPIE  SACRED  RIGHT  TO'  WORK 

Ernest  H.  Guffey  is  a  native  of  the  state  of  fowa 
and  was  at  the  time  of  the  great  coal  strike  a  citizen 


lOO  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

of  the  state  of  Kansas.  For  about  five  years  prior  to 
the  strike  he  had  Hved  in  Crawford  County,  Kansas, 
and  had  been  engaged  as  watchman  at  one  of  the  sur- 
face or  strip  mines.  Among  other  duties  he  was  re- 
quired to  attend  to  the  engine  during  the  night,  keep 
up  the  fires,  keep  the  pipes  from  freezing,  and  "steam 
up"  ready  for  the  day's  work  in  the  morning.  He  was 
a  member  of  local  union  No.  164  District  No.  14  of 
the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America.  He  claims  he 
had  authority  from  a  member  of  the  district  board  to 
continue  his  duties  during  the  strike  while  the  strip 
mine  was  being  worked  by  college  students  and  he  re- 
mained at  his  duties  until  the  strike  was  over.  Con- 
siderable coal  was  produced  at  this  mine  by  volunteer 
miners  during  that  bitter  December  to  help  relieve 
public  suffering. 

Within  a  few  days  after  the  strike  ended,  the  local 
union  suspended  Guffey  for  ninety-nine  years  and  his 
fellow  union  men  branded  him  as  a  "scab."  The  only 
charge  against  him  was  that  he  had  scabbed  during 
the  strike  by  working  for  the  state.  His  employers 
regarded  him  so  highly  that  they  refused  to  discharge 
him  and  all  the  miners  working  at  that  mine  quit.  The 
district  is  one-hundred  per  cent  unionized  so  the  mine 
closed  down  for  want  of  workers.  Three  months  after- 
wards, before  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  Guf- 
fey and  his  employers  told  their  story  under  oath.  The 
employers  testified  as  to  his  skill  and  fidelity  at  his  work 
and  of  their  desire  not  to  do  him  an  injustice  by  dis- 
charging him ;  but  stated  that  it  was  impossible  tO' 
operate  the  mine  while  he  remained ;  that  it  would  not 
be  practical  to  bring  in  men  from  elsewhere  to  work 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  lOI 

the  mine.  In  answer  to  the  question,  "What  would 
happen  if  that  should  be  done,"  the  superintendent  an- 
swered, "Well,  the  mine  workers  would  resent  it  and 
oppose  it  to  the  extent  that  I  feel  that  they  would  be 
successful  in  seeing  that  nobody  w^orked  at  that  mine." 

Various  petty  persecutions  were  indulged  in  against 
Gufifey.  He  was  ostracised  socially.  His  former 
friends  passed  him  by  with  a  scowl  or  a  sneer.  The 
grocers  refused  to  sell  him  provisions.  At  the  time  of 
the  investigation  he  was  getting  his  food  products  by 
parcel  post.  The  House  of  Representatives  in  the  Spe- 
cial Session  passed  a  glowing  resolution  commending 
him  for  his  loyalty  to  the  state  and  condemning  the 
local  union  for  its  action  in  suspending  him.  Stamped 
with  the  great  seal  of  the  state,  bedecked,  beribboned 
and  engrossed  on  parchment,  this  resolution  was  pre- 
sented to  Guffey  with  much  gusto. 

The  time  came  when  the  owners  of  the  little  mine 
could  no  longer  stand  the  financial  loss  and  Guffey  was 
relieved  of  his  position  and  left  the  neighborhood. 
Efforts  to  locate  him  have  been  vain.  It  is  to  be  hoped 
that  he  took  with  him  wherever  he  went  the  ornate 
resolution  of  the  House  of  Representatives.  The  state 
of  Kansas  gave  him  no  protection  in  a  substantial  way. 
His  right  to  pursue  the  avocation  of  his  choice  and  to 
live  in  the  domicile  of  his  selection  was  denied  him  by 
an  organization  of  individuals  exercising  powers  which 
"belong  only  to  government." 

At  the  192 1  session  of  the  legislature,  efforts  were 
made  by  persons  who  resent  that  kind  of  tyranny  to 
procure  the  passage  of  a  bill  providing  for  a  state  emer- 
gency police  force  which  might  be  used  to  protect  in- 


I02  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

dustrious,  law-abiding  men  who  desire  to  work  under 
such  circumstances ;  but  strong  political  influences  were 
marshaled  which  prevented  any  action,  and  the  bill 
was  killed  in  committee.  The  radical  element  in  or- 
ganized labor  in  Kansas,  as  elsewhere,  seems  to  be 
strongly  opposed  to  any  instrumentalities  of  govern- 
ment which  might  aid  in  the  enforcement  of  laws  to 
protect  working  men  under  such  circumstances,  and 
the  petty  politician  must  not  overlook  the  importance 
of  the  radical  labor  vote.  Sometime,  perhaps,  another 
great  emergency  may  arise  and  we  may  find  legislators 
and  other  public  men  willing  in  the  face  of  such  an 
emergency  to  pass  a  simple  measure  providing  for  the 
protection  of  such  men  as  Guffey. 

RESUME    OF   THE    FIRST    EIGHTEEN    MONTHS'    ADMINIS- 
TRATION   OF    THE    INDUSTRIAL    ACT 

The  Kansas  Industrial  Relations  Act  became  opera- 
tive January  24,  1920.  On  February  2,  following,  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  established  by  the  Act 
was  organized  and  began  to  function.  For  the  first 
year  of  the  Court's  existence  it  acted  in  a  dual  capa- 
city of  a  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  and  a  Public 
Utilities  Commission.  The  192 1  Legislature  reestab- 
lished the  public  utilities  commission  and  relieved  the 
Industrial  Court  of  the  burdens  of  utility  regulation. 
From  February  2,  1920,  to  August  i,  1921,  thirty- 
nine  formal  industrial  cases  have  been  filed.  Thirty- 
four  of  these  have  been  decided  and  orders  have  been 
issued.  Among  the  formal  cases,  there  have  been 
three  original  investigations  instituted  by  the  Court. 
The  Court  has  also  considered  many  informal  matters 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  IO3 

relating  to  industrial  conditions  and  contracts  of  em- 
ployment. 

THE   LAW    AND   LABOR 

Of  the  thirty-nine  formal  industrial  controversies 
instituted  in  the  Court,  thirty-seven  have  been  brought 
by  labor,  or  because  of  complaints  made  by  labor, — 
twenty-seven  by  organized  labor  and  ten  by  unorgan- 
ized groups  of  laborers.  Two  have  been  brought  by 
employers.  The  Amalgamated  Association  of  Street 
and  Electric  Railway  Employees  of  America,  the  Inter- 
national Brotherhood  of  Electrical  Workers,  the  Inter- 
national Brotherhood  of  Stationary  Firemen  and  Oil- 
ers, the  Amalgamated  Meat  Cutters'  and  Butchers' 
Workmen  of  North  America,  and  the  Brotherhood  of 
Railway  Carmen  of  America, — all  labor  organizations 
affiliated  with  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  have 
filed  cases  for  local  unions  in  Kansas.  In  many  of 
these  cases  the  national  or  international  representatives 
have  appeared  in  court  and  testified  or  assisted  in  the 
presentation  of  the  evidence.  One  case  was  brought 
by  a  group  of  members  of  various  local  unions  of  the 
United  Mine  Workers  of  America  engaged  in  what  is 
called  "shot  firing."  The  United  Mine  Workers  of 
America,  under  the  dominance  of  Alexander  Howat, 
is  violently  opposed  to  the  Industrial  Law,  but  a  num- 
ber of  the  individual  members  of  the  local  unions  are 
in  sympathy  with  the  law  and  with  the  Court.  In  one 
case  filed  by  organized  labor,  the  "open  shop"  had 
been  maintained  and  the  complaint  was  treated  by  the 
Court  as  a  complaint  on  behalf  of  all  employees,  both 
organized  and  unorganized.     Of  the  thirty-seven  suits 


I04  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

brought  by  labor,  twenty-nine  involved  wages,  eight 
involved  working  conditions  only.  Some  of  the  twen- 
ty-nine cases  involving  wages  also  asked  for  relief  in 
working  conditions.  Of  the  wage  disputes  decided, 
the  Court  refused  increases  in  but  three.  In  the  others 
some  increase  was  granted.  In  some  of  these  wage 
cases,  however,  the  total  wage  budget  was  not  in- 
creased but  a  readjustment  of  the  scale  was  made 
which  seemed  to  be  more  fair  to  the  workers  than  the 
scale  fomierly  in  effect. 

Labor  on  the  whole  has  appeared  to  be  fairly  well 
satisfied  with  its  treatment  in  the  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations.  Only  low  paid  labor,  however,  has  appealed 
to  the  Court.  The  workers  receiving  the  highest  scale 
of  wages  have  not  found  it  necessary  to  come  to  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  and,  furthermore,  seem 
to  be  hostile  rather  than  friendly  toward  the  law.  All 
of  the  orders  and  judgments  of  the  Court  so  far  have 
been  accepted  by  employers  and  employees  alike  with 
the  exception  of  the  last  one, — the  Wolff  Packing 
Company  case.  In  that  case  the  employer,  the  Wolff 
Packing  Company  of  Topeka,  Kansas,  has  availed  it- 
self of  the  provisions  of  Section  12  of  the  law  and 
has  taken  the  matter  for  a  review  tO'  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  state.  Laborers  have  in  every  case  accepted 
the  judgment  of  the  Industrial  Court  although  they 
might  have  demanded  a  review  by  the  Supreme  Court 
without  any  expense  to  themselves. 

THE  MINIMUM  WAGE 

The  Industrial  Law  permits  the  establishment  of  a 
minimum  wage  only.     The  minimum  wage,  under  the 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  I05 

law,  must  be  a  "fair  wage."  It  is  an  interesting  fact 
that  in  some  instances  the  employers  have  voluntarily- 
increased  the  wage  of  some  of  their  employees  above 
that  fixed  by  the  Court.  This,  as  a  rule,  has  been  done 
only  in  the  case  of  skilled  or  semi-skilled  laborers,  who 
under  economic  conditions,  seem  to  be  entitled  to  more 
than  a  minimum  wage. 

ORIGINAL  INVESTIGATIONS 

The  original  investigation  of  the  coal  mining  indus- 
try in  southeastern  Kansas  was  probably  the  most  im- 
portant matter  the  Court  has  had  before  it  since  its 
organization.  It  involved  working  conditions  for  eight 
or  ten  thousand  miners,  the  cost  of  mining  and  trans- 
porting coal  and  other  matters  of  general  interest  to 
the  public.  During  the  progress  of  this  investigation, 
the  Court  made  informal  bench  orders  giving  relief  to 
the  miners  from  some  onerous  conditions  which  had 
existed.  One  of  these  referred  to  what  is  known  as 
the  "check  off"  system,  which  was  modified  and  the 
operators  were  not  permitted  to  "check  off"  from  the 
miner's  pay  unjust  fines  assessed  against  him  by  his 
local  union.  Another  order  had  reference  to  the  dis- 
count charged  miners  for  money  advanced  between 
pay  days.  The  third  informal  order  made  at  this  in- 
vestigation had  to  do  with  the  price  paid  by  tlie  miners 
for  explosives  and  other  pit  materials  which  they  are 
required  to  purchase  from  the  operators.  As  a  result 
of  this  investigation,  also,  the  Court  pubhshed  in 
pamphlet  form  its  analysis  of  the  cost  of  producing 
coal  and  of  transporting  it  to  various  typical  towns  in 


I06  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

the  state.  This  work  was  done  under  the  supervision 
of  the  Court's  chief  accountant  and  gives  valuable  in- 
formation to  the  public  in  regard  to  the  purchase  of 
coal. 

INTANGIBLE  VALUES 

Many  of  the  less  important  controversies  which  arise 
in  industries  have  been  settled  and  adjusted  by  exam- 
iners sent  out  by  the  Court  for  that  purpose.  The 
value  of  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act  as  a  repressive 
measure  cannot  be  accurately  estimated  but  there  is  no 
doubt  that  strikes  and  other  industrial  disputes  have 
been  averted  because  of  the  penal  features  of  the  Act. 
In  one  instance,  the  chairman  of  a  strike  committee, 
after  reading  Section  19  of  the  Act  is  said  to  have 
declined  to  serve  on  the  committee  and  said  to  the  other 
members,  "You  boys  can  run  your  heads  into  that 
noose  if  you  want  to,  but  I  will  not  do  it."  The  strike 
was  not  called  and  the  controversy  was  settled  within 
the  industry. 

REDUCING  STRIKES  TO  THE  VANISHING  POINT 

There  were  some  sporadic  cessations  of  work  in  the 
mining  district  in  Kansas  in  August,  1920,  resulting 
from  controversies  between  the  workers  and  the  em- 
ployers over  the  interpretation  of  trivial  provisions  of 
the  contract  of  employment.  These  sporadic  cessa- 
tions of  work  have  been  widely  advertised  as  strikes 
in  violation  of  the  Kansas  law.  They  were  nothing 
of  the  kind.  The  Industrial  Court  made  an  investiga- 
tion of  these  alleged  strikes  and  found  that  the  produc- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  IO7 

tion  of  coal  in  the  district  was  greater  than  the  abihty 
of  the  railroads  to  transport  the  coal  out  of  the  dis- 
trict. The  production  of  coal  and  the  supplying  of 
coal  to  the  state  was  in  no  way  interfered  with  and 
there  was  no  public  interest  involved  and  the  Court 
refused  to  take  action  because  it  had  no  jurisdiction. 
The  matter  was  settled  by  Mr.  Lewis,  president  of  the 
United  Mine  Workers  of  America,  who  overruled 
Alexander  Howat,  president  of  the  local  district,  and 
ordered  the  men  back  to  work  under  the  terms  of  their 
contract.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  production  of  coal 
in  the  district  was  approximately  twenty  per  cent 
greater  in  1920  than  in  19 19,  and  there  was  a  corre- 
sponding increase  in  the  earnings  of  the  workers. 

There  have  been  but  four  strikes  called  in  violation 
of  the  law.  One  was  a  strike  involving  two  hundred 
miners  in  one  of  the  small  mines,  called  by  Alexander 
Howat  and  a  majority  of  the  local  board.  This  strike 
was  called  ostensibly  because  of  a  failure  of  a  mining 
company  to  pay  something  like  two  hundred  dollars 
to  a  member  of  the  union,  which  was  claimed  to  be  due 
him  because  of  a  failure  tO'  advance  his  wages  at  the 
time  they  should  have  been  advanced.  The  men  re- 
mained on  strike  for  twelve  days  and  lost  more  than 
$12,000  in  wages. 

One  other  strike  was  also  a  miners'  strike  called  by 
Alexander  Howat  and  his  associates,  and  involved  only 
one  hundred  and  fifty  men.  Neither  of  these  strikes 
affected  the  public  because  of  the  small  number  of 
men  involved.  The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  has 
no  criminal  jurisdiction  and  no  general  jurisdiction.  If 
it  had  not  been  for  the  penal  features  of  the  law,  it  is 


Io8  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

likely  that  no  action  would  have  been  taken  in  either 
of  these  matters.  But  as  the  calling  of  a  strike  by  labor 
leaders  is,  under  the  terms  of  the  Kansas  Industrial 
Act,  unlawful,  action  was  taken  against  Mr.  Howat 
and  his  associates.  The  calling  of  these  strikes  was  in 
violation  of  an  injunction  issued  out  of  the  district 
court  of  Crawford  County,  in  which  the  mines  are 
located.  President  Howat  and  his  associates  were  pros- 
ecuted for  violation  of  this  injunction  and,  in  the  first 
case,  were  each  sentenced  to  one  year  in  jail.  From 
that  sentence  they  appealed  to  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  state  and  that  Court  has  affirmed  the  judgment  and 
sentence.  This  case  involved  a  real  test  of  the  law. 
The  Supreme  Court  sustained  the  constitutionality  of 
the  Act  on  all  points  raised  in  the  case.-^  In  the 
second  case,  they  were  also  prosecuted  for  contempt  of 
the  injunction  and  were  fined  and  required  to  give  a 
bond  conditioned  that  they  should  not  call  another 
strike.  They  have  appealed  this  case  also  to  the  Su- 
preme Court. 

For  the  calling  of  the  first  strike,  Alexander  Howat, 
president,  and  August  Dorchy,  vice-president,  were 
prosecuted  criminally  in  the  District  Court  of  Cherokee 
County  (in  which  county  the  mine  is  located).  The 
trial  was  attended  with  some  remarkable  incidents. 
The  president  of  the  State  Federation  of  Labor  called 
a  "holiday"  and  advised  all  union  men  to  quit  work 
and  proceed  to  Columbus,  Kansas,  to  make  a  demon- 
stration in  favor  of  Howat.  There  was  no  general 
response  to  this  proclamation  but  the  miners,  following 
their  long-established  custom,  all  quit  work  during  the 
**  State  ex  rel.  v.  Alex.  Howat,  et  al.,  109  Kansas  Reports  376, 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  IO9 

trial.  Perhaps  as  many  as  two  thousand  miners  pro- 
ceeded from  various  parts  of  the  mining  district  to 
Columbus,  the  county-seat  of  Cherokee  County,  but  the 
sheriff  took  care  of  the  crowds  by  a  small  force  of 
deputies  and  kept  the  court-house  square  and  the 
streets  free.  The  trial  proceeded  and  a  jury  of  twelve 
men  was  impaneled  from  the  body  of  Cherokee  Coun- 
ty. After  a  trial  lasting  several  days  without  any  espe- 
cially exciting  features,  the  jury  returned  a  verdict  of 
guilty.  The  defendants,  Howat  and  Dorchy,  were 
sentenced  to  six  months  in  the  county  jail,  to  pay  a  fine 
of  two  hundred  dollars  each,  and  to  give  bond  in  the 
sum  of  two  thousand  dollars  each,  conditioned  that 
they  would  hereafter  obey  the  law.  The  giving  of 
the  two  tliousand  dollar  peace  bond  was  made  pre- 
requisite to  the  right  of  appeal.  Both  men  refused  to 
give  a  bond  which  would  be  forfeited  by  the  calling  of 
another  strike.  On  the  thirtieth  of  September,  192 1, 
they  began  serving  their  sentences. 

This  was  tlie  occasion  of  a  general  cessation  of  work 
by  the  miners  in  accordance  with  their  former  custom. 
This  is  what  has  been  called  the  "Coal  Strike."  So 
far  as  state  officials  know,  the  miners  were  not  called 
out  by  the  order  of  Mr.  Howat,  Mr.  Dorchy,  or  the 
District  Board.  Soon  after  October  ist,  the  interna- 
tional officers  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  of  America 
deposed  Mr.  Howat  and  his  District  Board,  suspended 
the  district,  and  ordered  the  miners  back  to  work. 
This  precipitated  a  fight  within  the  organization.  It 
has  been  charged  that  the  Industrial  Law  failed  in  this 
regard,  that  it  did  not  immediately  restore  production 
of  coal.     This  charge  is  wholly  unfounded.     The  In- 


no  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

dustrial  Court  took  no  action  in  the  matter.  The  pre- 
vaiHng  opinion  in  the  Court  was  that,  as  there  was  an 
abundance  of  coal  and  there  was  no  danger  of  public 
suffering,  the  controversy  between  the  two  factions  of 
the  union  should  be  allowed  to  take  its  course,  unless  in 
the  meantime  the  public  peace  might  be  threatened  or 
a  shortage  of  fuel  should  become  imminent.  The  result 
has  been  that  the  International  Union  has  won  its  fight 
and  has,  no  doubt,  permanently  deposed  the  radical 
leaders  and  excluded  from  the  Union  the  lawless  ele- 
ment. At  one  time  there  was  rioting  on  the  part  of 
women  in  the  mining  villages.  There  was  no  loss  of 
life  and  no  serious  damage  done,  but  the  disturbance 
was  such  that  the  governor  called  out  the  National 
Guard  to  preserve  order.  After  a  short  time  all  the 
Guard  was  sent  home  except  one  hundred  selected  men 
who  were  detailed  to  act  as  a  special  police  until  such 
time  as  their  services  would  be  no  further  needed.  Tlie 
following  editorial  appeared  in  the  Topeka  State  Jour- 
nal on  January  13,  1922,  and  is  a  fair  statement  of  the 
culmination  of  the  coal  strike : 

"Under  a  constitutional  government,  nobody  can 
persistently  defy  the  law  and  get  away  with  it.  This 
truth  again  has  been  demonstrated  by  the  action  of 
Alexander  Howat  in  calling  off  the  strike  of  miners  in 
the  Pittsburg  district.  The  whole  is  greater  than  any 
of  its  parts.  No  amount  of  bluff  and  bluster  on  the 
part  of  Howat  can  alter  the  facts.  He  has  been  beaten. 
So  long  as  the  strikers  were  maintained  in  idleness  by 
their  fellow  workers  in  other  parts  of  the  country  a 
show  of  resistance  could  be  kept  up,  even  tho  Howat 
remained  in  jail.  When  working  miners  began  to  with- 
draw their  support  and  in  consequence  thereof  Howat's 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  III 

followers  began  to  return  to  work,  there  was  nothing 
left  for  him  but  to  surrender  or  lose  whatever  sem- 
blance of  power  is  left  to  him.  The  victory  won  by 
the  Kansas  court  of  industrial  relations  promises  to  be 
of  far-reaching  consequences  in  the  future  relations  of 
both  employees  and  employers  to  the  public." 

PROGRAM  FOR  RESUMING  COAL  PRODUCTION  IN  KANSAS 

On  the  5th  of  October,  192 1,  five  days  after  the 
incarceration  of  Mr.  Howat  and  Mr.  Dorchy,  the  In- 
dustrial Court  held  a  conference  to  determine  its  course 
of  action  in  the  matter.  At  that  time  the  presiding 
judge  submitted  what  he  called  a  "Program  for  Re- 
suming Coal  Production  in  Kansas."  The  program 
was  not  adopted  by  the  Court  because  the  majority  be- 
lieved that  there  was  no  immediate  occasion  for  inter- 
vention on  the  part  of  the  state.  The  proposed  pro- 
gram is  given  here  merely  as  showing  the  possibilities 
of  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law  in  case  of  a  serious 
strike  in  the  coal  fields  of  this  state : 

I 

"The  Industrial  Court  should  at  once  ask  the  gov- 
ernor, under  the  provisions  of  Sec.  6209,  Gen.  Stat. 
191 5,  to  organize,  through  the  Adjutant  General,  a 
military  police  force  of  sufficient  strength  and  of  se- 
lected men  from  the  various  National  Guard  units  (by 
voluntary  enlistment  if  possible).  Said  military  police 
force  should  be  used  if  needed  in  the  mining  district 
to  protect  miners  who  are  willing  to  work,  so  long  as 
such  protection  may  be  needed. 

ir 

"If  operation  is  not  resumed,  or  practically  assured, 
on  or  before  October  12,  1921,  the  Court  should  at  once 
ascertain  the  cause  of  the  cessation  of  production.     If 


112  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

it  is  caused  by  defiance  of  the  Industrial  Act  as  re- 
ported, then  the  Court  should  ascertain  whether,  with 
police  protection,  the  operators  will  be  able  to  resume 
operations  with  the  miners  now  in  the  district.  If  not, 
and  the  operators  are  willing  to  resume,  the  Court 
should  aid  in  getting  labor  from  elsewhere  to  operate 
the  mines. 

Ill 

"There  is  abundant  evidence  now  before  the  Court 
which  would  warrant  abolishing  the  'check  ofif'  system, 
and  this  should  be  done. 


IV 

"If  the  operators  are  unable  or  unwilling  to  proceed 
immediately  in  the  production  of  coal,  then  the  Court 
should  proceed  under  Section  20  of  the  Industrial  Act 
to  take  over  and  operate  the  mines. 


"If  it  becomes  necessary  for  the  Court  to  take  over 
the  mines,  the  program  should  be  substantially  as  above 
indicated.  Protection,  ample  and  permanent,  should 
be  provided  by  the  state  and  a  repetition  of  the  perse- 
cution and  practical  exiling  of  Mr.  Guffey,  the  one 
unionized  miner  who  was  loyal  during  the  last  strike, 
should  be  rendered  impossible. 


VI 

"In  all  matters  relating  to  the  policing  of  the  dis- 
trict, the  state  should  cooperate  with  the  sherifT  of 
Crawford  County  and  the  sherifif  of  Cherokee  County. 
These  men  are  both  men  of  nerve,  are  faithful  to  their 
trust,  and  I  have  no  doubt  can  be  relied  upon  implicitly 
to  do  their  duty. 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  II3 

VII 

"Immediately  after  coal  production  is  resumed,  the 
attorney  for  this  tribunal  and  the  attorney  general 
should  be  requested  to  institute  an  investigation  to  as- 
certain whether  there  have  been  any  violations  of  the 
injunction  order  issued  by  Judge  Curran  of  the  Dis- 
trict Court  of  Crawford  County ;  and  if  so,  proper  pro- 
ceedings should  be  instituted  against  the  guilty  parties. 

VIII 

"Immediately  after  coal  production  is  resumed,  the 
attorney  for  this  tribunal,  the  attorney  general  and  the 
county  attorney  of  Crawford  County  should  also  be 
requested  to  ascertain  whether  there  have  been  any 
violations  of  Sections  18  and  19  of  the  Industrial  Act; 
and,  if  so,  proper  proceedings  should  be  instituted 
against  the  guilty  parties." 

The  only  other  strike  of  any  importance  was  the 
recent  nation-a\'ide  "Packers'  Strike."  The  interna- 
tional officers  of  the  Amalgamated  Meat  Cutters  and 
Butchers  Workmen  of  North  America  ordered  the 
strike.  At  Kansas  City,  Kansas,  and  at  Wichita,  Kan- 
sas, some  of  the  members  of  that  organization  under- 
took to  obey  the  order  of  the  international  officers. 
The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  held  sessions  in 
Kansas  City,  Kansas,  to  ascertain  the  facts  with  regard 
to  the  controversy.  The  employers  in  that  instance 
claimed  that  there  was  no  controversy  between  them 
and  their  employees,  that  new  wage  schedules  and 
working  conditions  had  been  entered  into  through  shop 
committees  which  were  satisfactory  to  the  majority  of 
the  employees.  After  having  been  served  with  sum- 
mons in  the  case,  the  local  union  officials  defaulted  by 


114  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

failing  to  file  any  answer  or  make  any  appearance. 
Under  the  circumstances  the  leaders  of  the  union  being 
in  the  attitude  of  defying  the  law  and  the  mass  of  the 
working  people  apparently  satisfied  and  at  work,  no 
trial  of  the  controversy  seemed  to  be  feasible  at  the 
time  and  nobody  was  demanding  trial.  The  Indus- 
trial Court  insisted  upon  the  strict  enforcement  of  the 
anti-picketing  and  anti-intimidation  features  of  the 
law.  The  city  government  and  the  city  police  force 
very  efficiently  enforced  the  law.  After  the  second  day 
of  the  alleged  strike,  there  was  no  disturbance  of  any 
moment,  the  stockyards  at  all  times  were  open,  the  live- 
stock market  was  undisturbed  and  the  packing  plants 
operated  with  reasonable  efficiency,  and  after  a  week 
or  ten  days,  with  normal  efficiency.  The  "packers' 
strike"  in  Kansas  amounted  to  practically  nothing. 
The  strike  was  called  for  December  5th,  1921,  and  on 
December  8th,  1921,  the  Kansas  City  Journal  con- 
tained the  following  editorial  which  fairly  stated  the 
situation  and  .it  is  believed  fairly  states  the  general 
opinion  of  the  unbiased  public : 

THE  LAW  IS  VINDICATED 

"The  virtual  collapse  of  the  packing  house  strike  in 
this  section  is  an  effective  vindication  of  the  Kansas 
court  of  industrial  relations  law,  which  no  amount  of 
misrepresentation  can  distort  into  an  instrument  for  the 
denial  of  any  rights  to  'labor'  which  are  enjoyed  by 
'capital.' 

"The  opponents  of  the  law  base  their  opposition, 
though  they  do  not  admit  it,  upon  the  fact  that  it  sets 
up  legal  machinery  for  the  protection  of  all  concerned, 
employee,  employer  and  the  public.    That  is,  of  course, 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  II5 

not  what  the  radical  element  wants.  The  radicals  keep 
out  of  employment  thousands  of  persons,  men  who  are 
loyal  unionists  but  who  are  afraid  to  expose  themselves 
to  the  vengeance  of  the  radicals. 

"Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  packing  house  strike 
in  other  sections,  where  such  measures  as  the  court  of 
industrial  relations  law  are  not  available,  the  Kansas 
field  is  the  very  last  where  a  strike  is  justified.  The 
vigorous  enforcement  of  the  law  has  deprived  strikers 
of  the  weapon  upon  which  they  have  relied  in  the  past 
to  win  their  victories — the  opportunity  to  compel  the 
workers  to  strike,  to  prevent  by  violence  others  from 
earning  a  living,  to  club  the  employers  into  submission 
and  especially  to  deny  to  the  public  its  fundamental 
rights  in  the  premises. 

"It  is  not  to  be  wondered  that  other  states  have 
enacted  similar  laws  and  that  the  president  of  the 
United  States  has  formally  recommended  to  congress 
the  enactment  of  a  federal  statute  containing  the  essen- 
tial provisions  of  the  Kansas  law,  the  pioneer  in  the 
great  movement  for  the  protection  of  the  hitherto  ig- 
nored and  oppressed  public." 


THE  TESTS  OF  THE  LAW 

Every  test  of  the  Industrial  Act  which  has  been  de- 
termined has  resulted  favorably.  The  district  court  of 
Crawford  County,  Kansas,  (the  home  of  Alexander 
Howat  and  the  biggest  coal  producing  county  in  the 
state)  sustained  the  law  by  committing  the  officials  of 
the  miners  district  union  to  jail  for  refusal  to  obey 
process  issued  by  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations. 
The  same  district  court  further  upheld  the  Industrial 
Act  by  enjoining  the  calling  of  strikes  and  committing 
the  leaders  to  jail  for  violation  of  that  injunction.  In 
the  district  court  of  Cherokee  County,  Kansas,   (the 


Il6  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

next  biggest  mining  county  in  the  state)  a  jury  con- 
victed the  president  and  vice  president  of  the  miners' 
district  union  of  a  misdemeanor  for  violation  of  the 
Industrial  Law  in  calling  a  strike,  and  the  district  judge 
of  that  county  committed  said  officials  to  jail  upon  such 
conviction.  In  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  state  of  Kan- 
sas all  of  the  fundamental  features  of  the  law  have 
been  upheld  as  constitutional  and  valid  by  unanimous 
decisions,  all  seven  justices  sitting  and  concurring.^* 

AN    ILL-FOUNDED   OBJECTION 

Recently  from  high  sources  an  objection  has  been 
raised  that  the  Kansas  law  will  prove  futile  because 
the  Industrial  Court  thereby  created  has  no  code  of 
procedure  and  no  body  of  principles  to  guide  it.  By 
one  of  its  own  provisions,  the  Industrial  Law  is  de- 
clared to  be  cumulative  of  all  other  laws  upon  the 
statute  books.  The  Indiistrial  Court  may  therefore  call 
to  its  aid  any  portion  of  the  code  of  civil  procedure 
which  it  may  find  necessary.  The  Industrial  Act  itself 
provides  in  a  general  way  a  code  of  procedure  and  lays 
down  general  principles  which  serve  as  a  guide  to  the 
Industrial  Court.  The  industrial  controversy  is  not  so 
different  from  other  human  controversies  as  it  might 
seem.  General  principles,  as  found  in  the  statute  and 
common  law  of  the  land  and  in  that  great  reservoir  of 
law — the  published  decisions  of  courts  of  last  resort — 
may  be  made  to  apply  to  very  many  problems  that  come 

**  State  of  Kansas  v.  Jerry  Scott,  109  Kan.  166  (No.  i  adv. 
sheets)  ;  State  of  Kansas  v.  Alexander  Howat,  109  Kan.  376  (No. 
2  adv.  sheets)  ;  State  of  Kansas  v.  Wolff  Packing  Co.,  109  Kan. 
629  (No.  4  adv.  sheets). 


LABOR     AND     DEISIOCRACY  II7 

before  the  industrial  tribunal.  We  are  not,  therefore, 
wholly  without  precedent,  principle  and  rule  to  guide 
us.    It  has  been  said  by  very  eminent  authority  that : 

"The  common  law  grew  with  society,  not  ahead  of 
it.  As  society  became  more  complex  and  new  demands 
were  made  upon  the  law  by  reason  of  new  circum- 
stances, the  courts  .  .  .  out  of  the  storehouse  of  reason 
and  good  sense  declared  the  common  law." 

In  attempting-  to  solve  the  new  problems  that  come 
before  it,  already  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  has 
been  compelled  to  resort  to  the  "storehouse  of  reason 
and  good  sense."  It  has  already  stated  certain  prin- 
ciples by  which  it  has  been  guided.    Some  of  these  are : 

1.  The  basic  eight-hour  working  day,  contended  for 
by  labor,  is  not  sacred.  The  length  of  the  working  day 
depends  upon  the  nature  of  the  work.  In  some  occu- 
pations eight  hours  or  less  may  be  proper,  in  others 
where  the  work  is  lighter  and  the  conditions  better, 
nine  or  ten  hours  may  be  proper.  The  social  rights  of 
the  worker  should  be  preserved  to  him  by  limiting  the 
working  hours  to  such  an  extent  as  that  he  may  have 
a  reasonable  time  for  recreation  and  for  the  family 
circle. 

2.  The  "one-man-one-job"  rule  of  the  union,  where 
it  causes  economic  waste,  is  wrong  and  workmen 
should  be  allowed  to  work  at  two  jobs  if  they  can  do 
so  without  physical  injury  to  themselves.  No  arbitrary 
rule  of  the  union  which  involves  an  economic  waste 
will  be  approved. 

3.  A  fair  wage  for  skilled  and  faithful  workers 
should  be  such  as  to  enable  them  to  procure  for  them- 


Il8  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

selves  and  family  all  the  necessaries  and  a  reasonable 
share  of  the  comforts  of  life,  to  properly  support  and 
educate  their  children  and  to  provide  decently  for  sick- 
ness and  old  age. 

4.  Collective  bargaining  is  right  and  proper,  and 
should  be  recognized  and  encouraged  but  a  collective 
bargain  must  be  fair  to  the  public  and  free  from  duress 
and  intimidation. 

5.  The  unorganized  worker  must  be  protected  in  his 
right  to  work  as  well  as  the  organized  worker. 

6.  Workers  on  strike  are  not  employees  in  the  sense 
of  the  Kansas  law  and  their  jobs  therefore  are  not  en- 
titled to  the  protection  of  the  law. 

7.  The  anti-picketing  features  of  the  law  must  be 
strictly  enforced  by  the  local  authorities ;  otherwise  the 
court  will  call  upon  the  governor  for  military  protec- 
tion. 

8.  Capital  invested  in  the  essential  industries  must 
be  protected  in  its  right  to  a  fair  return ;  but  in  an  ex- 
treme case,  wages  to  labor  must  be  regarded  as  of  first 
importance. 

It  will  be  seen,  therefore,  that  the  process  of  estab- 
lishing such  rules,  principles  and  precedents  as  may  be 
necessary  in  the  adjudication  of  industrial  controversies 
is  going  forward.  The  objection  above  stated  is  not 
well  founded. 

A  THOUGHTLESS  CRITICISM 

Reckless  opponents  of  the  Kansas  industrial  law 
have  loudly  insisted  that  the  law  will  be  futile  and  that 
it  cannot  be  enforced  for  the  reason  that  it  is  impos- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  II9 

sible  to  imprison  large  bodies  of  striking  workmen. 
Strange  as  it  may  seem,  at  least  one  of  the  prominent 
friends  of  the  law  has  admitted  this  point  as  an  objec- 
tion. Evidently  this  admission  was  made  thoughtlessly. 
Evidently  this  charge  was  made  by  the  opponents  of 
the  law  either  without  thought  or  with  a  deliberate 
intent  to  mislead. 

No  law  was  ever  enacted  by  which  large  numbers  of 
men  could  be  imprisoned.  If  a  mob  breaks  loose  in  a 
community  and  commits  a  crime,  the  public  authorities 
will  have  done  well  if  they  arrest,  prosecute  and  im- 
prison five  or  six  of  the  leaders.  In  case  of  insurrec- 
tion the  same  result  would  follow.  At  the  close  of  the 
Civil  War,  the  gallant  leader  of  a  defeated  army  sur- 
rendered his  sword  to  the  opposing  commander.  It 
was  returned  to  him  and  he  was  told  to  permit  his 
troopers  to  retain  their  horses  as  they  would  need  them 
in  the  spring  plowing. 

The  Kansas  Industrial  Law  does  not  contemplate  the 
jailing  of  large  bodies  of  men.  It  does  provide  for  the 
prosecution  of  the  leaders  who  call  the  strike  and  it 
does  provide  punishment  for  those  who  conspire  or 
confederate  together  to  cripple  an  industry  or  who 
willfully  violate  the  provisions  of  the  Act  or  any  valid 
order  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations.  It  does 
provide  for  the  policing  of  a  disturbed  district  and  for 
the  protection  of  men  who  desire  to  work.  This  is 
what  was  done  in  Kansas  in  the  coal  strike  after  some 
delay  and  it  is  what  was  done  in  the  Kansas  packing 
strike  immediately.  In  each  case  police  protection  af- 
forded those  who  desired  to  work  was  sufficient  to 
keep  the  industry  going  and  prevent  public  inconveni- 


I20  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

ence  or  suffering.  It  is  unfortunate  that  the  Kansas 
Industrial  Law  has  been  interpreted  to  the  puHic  almost 
wholly  by  men  who  are  not  lawyers  and  who  are  not 
competent  to  interpret  the  law  in  the  spirit  in  which 
it  was  written  and  in  the  spirit  in  which  it  has  been  in- 
terpreted by  the  courts, 

A  man  cannot  be  convicted  of  a  crime  unless  crim- 
inal intent  is  proved  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt.  Union- 
ized -workers  who  quit  at  the  order  of  their  leaders  may 
have  no  such  criminal  intent.  In  view  of  the  experi- 
ences of  the  past,  a  unionized  worker  who  goes  out  on 
strike  at  the  command  of  his  superior  officers  might 
well  say  in  his  defense  that  he  quit  because  he  was 
afraid  to  continue  at  work,  that  he  quit  because  he  did 
not  desire  to  be  branded  a  "scab,"  to  be  socially  ostra- 
cised, or  to  run  the  chances  of  the  violence  which  so 
often  occurs  in  such  cases.  The  Kansas  Industrial  Law 
was  not  intended  to  imprison  men  merely  because  they 
quit  work.  This  is  a  matter  of  their  own  choice.  It 
is  not  hard  and  it  is  not  expensive  to  police  a  dis- 
turbed district  and  protect  the  men  who  desire  to  work. 
Experience  in  Kansas  has  shown  that  such  protection, 
when  afforded,  has  been  sufficient  to  solve  the  problem. 

It  is  the  duty  of  government  to  protect  people  from 
the  evils  of  industrial  warfare  as  well  as  from  inva- 
sion by  a  foreign  foe;  to  protect  the  babies  of  Chicago 
or  New  York  from  disease  and  death,  occasioned  by  a 
strike  of  violence  on  the  part  of  drivers  of  milk  wagons, 
as  well  as  to  protect  the  bankers  of  Brownsville,  Tex., 
from  a  raid  of  Mexican  bandits  across  the  border. 
It  is  the  duty  of  government  to  "provide  for  the  com- 
mon defense,  promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  121 

the  blessings  of  liberty"  for  all  the  people.  A  govern- 
ment which  does  not  perform  that  duty  is  unworthy  of 
the  loyalty  of  its  citizens. 


THE   KANSAS   EXPERIMENT 

In  the  democratic  countries  of  the  world,  the  law 
springs  from  the  needs  of  the  people  and  keeps  pace 
with  the  developments  of  civilization.  Every  perman- 
ent addition  to  the  law  of  the  land,  takes  root  in  pub- 
lic necessity  and  grows  from  such  necessity  as  a  tree 
grows  from  the  soil.  Legislatures  as  a  rule  do  not 
enact  laws  until  there  is  an  impending  necessity  for 
them.  The  need  for  new  legislation  must  be  present  or 
imminently  prospective.  Otherwise,  the  statute  books 
would  be  filled  with  legislative  enactments  which  might 
never  be  needed  in  the  government  of  the  country.  In 
the  framing  of  the  Kansas  Industrial  Act  the  attempt 
was  made  to  bring  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court 
of  Industrial  Relations  only  those  industries  upon 
which  the  public  must  depend  for  the  necessaries  and 
comforts  of  life.  Furthermore,  within  the  terms  of 
the  Act  were  included  only  such  industries  and  voca- 
tions as  experience  had  shown  were  especially  subject 
to  such  dangers  of  industrial  warfare  as  would  threaten 
the  public  peace,  the  public  health,  and  the  general  wel- 
fare. The  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions therefore  is  circumscribed.  The  building  trades 
are  not  included.  Housing  is  a  necessity,  but  it  was 
not  thought  that  industrial  warfare  had  so  invaded  that 
field  as  to  make  it  necessary  for  the  state  to  interfere. 
Agriculture,  of  course,  was  not  included.    There  never 


122  LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY 

had  been  any  occasion  to  regulate  the  farmer.  At  all 
times  and  under  all  circumstances,  he  had  produced 
food  for  the  public  to  the  limit  of  his  capacity.  There 
never  had  been  a  strike  among  agriculturists.  It  may 
be  that  in  future  times  conditions  may  change  to  such 
an  extent  that  it  will  be  necessary  in  the  protection  of 
the  public  peace,  the  public  health,  and  the  general  wel- 
fare that  other  industries  and  vocations  must  be 
brought  within  the  terms  of  the  Industrial  Law  and 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations. 
That  is  a  matter  with  which  we  need  not  concern  our- 
selves at  this  time. 

Sociologists,  welfare  workers,  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel, and  many  other  benevolently  inclined  persons  have 
condemned  the  Kansas  law  upon  the  theory  that  a  con- 
troversy with  regard  to  wages,  hours  of  labor,  and 
working  conditions  ought  to  be  settled  within  the  indus- 
try by  means  of  conciliation,  arbitration,  cooperation, 
etc.  It  is  freely  conceded  that  there  are  problems  af- 
fecting employers  and  employees  which  cannot  be  prop- 
erly settled  except  by  sympathetic  cooperation  and  a 
spirit  of  fair  play,  but  this  is  not  a  legitimate  argument 
against  the  Kansas  Industrial  Law.  This  Act  in  no 
way  hampers  or  restricts  the  operation  of  all  such  altru- 
istic methods  of  settlement  of  industrial  controversies. 
It  is  only  after  all  such  methods  have  failed  and  when 
industrial  warfare  is  imminent  and  the  public  interest 
becomes  jeopardized  that  the  Kansas  Act  becomes 
operative.  Then  and  only  then  the  Industrial  Court 
has  jurisdiction  to  restore  and  preserve  industrial  peace 
until  such  time  as  the  parties  may  agree.  Every  order 
made  by  the  Court  is  temporary  in  its  nature  and  auto- 


LABOR     AND     DEMOCRACY  I23 

matically  ceases  to  become  operative  when  the  parties 
have  agreed,  except  in  case  the  agreement  may  be  un- 
fair to  the  general  pubHc. 

It  is  not  contended  that  the  present  law  is  the  "last 
word"  in  such  legislation.  All  that  is  claimed  for  it  is 
that  it  is  one  day's  journey  toward  better  industrial 
conditions  and  the  realization  of  a  fuller  measure  of 
industrial  justice.  It  is  hoped  and  believed  that  a 
proper  administration  of  the  law  will  prevent  indus- 
trial warfare  in  all  its  forms ;  that  it  will  relieve  capi- 
tal, labor  and  the  general  public  from  the  tremendous 
economic  waste  which  always  follows  in  the  wake  of 
war;  that  to  some  extent  it  will  protect  the  public 
against  profiteering  prices  and  from  economic  disturb- 
ances which  are  often  caused  by  the  strike,  the  lockout 
and  the  boycott ;  that  it  will  steady  the  production  and 
transportation  of  the  necessaries  of  life,  providing  at 
all  times  an  ample  supply  of  such  necessaries  and  thus 
stabilizing  the  price  which  the  public  must  pay  for  the 
same.  It  is  also  hoped  that  the  proper  administration 
of  the  Industrial  Law  will,  to  a  large  extent  at  least, 
protect  the  worker  m  his  right  to  a  fair  wage,  to  moral 
and  healthful  surroundings  while  engaged  in  his  labor, 
and  to  a  fair  opportunity  to  earn  a  comfortable  living. 
Enemies  of  our  form  of  government  take  advantage  of 
industrial  and  economic  disturbances  to  decry  democ- 
racy and  to  seek  to  build  up  in  this  country  opposition 
to  our  form  of  government  and  disrespect  for  our  laws. 
It  is  believed  that  the  strict  enforcement  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Industrial  Act,  by  creating  better  eco- 
nomic and  industrial  conditions,  will  rob  the  agitators 
of  their  chief  argument  and  it  is  also  hoped  that  the 


124  APPENDIX 

penal  features  of  the  Industrial  Law  will  have  the  ef- 
fect of  preventing  much  of  the  agitation  which  has 
been  carried  on  in  the  past  few  years.  If  these  results 
may  be  accomplished,  the  whole  citizenship  will  profit 
by  the  greater  respect  and  reverence  for  government 
which  must  result  among  all  classes  of  our  people. 


PART  FOUR 
APPENDIX 

INTRODUCTORY    NOTE 

In  this  appendix  will  be  found  the  Industrial  Law  itself, 
and  certain  other  matters  which  it  is  believed  will  be  inter- 
esting to  persons  who  are  studying  the  law  and  the  prin- 
ciples of  industrial  justice  which  it  contains  and  which  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  has  been  trying  to  ad- 
minister. 

Included  herein  is  an  excerpt  from  a  decision  rendered 
by  the  Public  Utilities  Commission  of  Kansas  some  six 
months  before  the  Industrial  Act  was  introduced  into  the 
legislature.  This  matter  is  printed  here  for  the  reason 
that  it  contains  a  statement  of  the  social  rights  of  laboring 
people.  This  statement  created  great  interest  among  wel- 
fare workers  all  over  the  United  States.  The  Public  Utili- 
ties Commission  decision  was  written  by  the  author  of 
this  book  and  because  of  the  statement  of  the  social  rights 
of  workers  therein  contained,  the  author  was  called  upon 
to  take  part  in  a  Rotary  Club  program  on  the  subject  of 
relations  between  employer  and  employee.  The  speech 
delivered  before  the  Rotary  Club  is  also  ])rinted  herein. 
This  speech  came  to  the  attention  of  the  governor  of  Kan- 
sas and  was  the  cause  of  the  author  of  this  book  being 
called  upon  to  write  the  bill  which  afterward  became  the 
Kansas  Industrial  Act.  The  principles  of  the  Industrial 
Law  are  set  out  in  detail  in  the  Rotary  speech  and  a  com- 
parison of  the  speech  with  the  act  itself  will  show  that  the 
law  is  an  outgrowth  of  the  speech. 

125 


126  APPENDIX 

Certain  typical  opinions  of  the  Industrial  Court  are  also 
included  in  this  appendix  in  the  belief  that  they  at  least 
indicate  the  manner  in  which  the  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions is  seeking  to  administer  industrial  justice,  and  that 
they  state  some  general  principles  which  must  be  applied 
if  industrial  conditions  in  this  country  are  to  be  improved. 

SOCIAL  RIGHTS   OF   WORKERS 

In  June,  191 9,  an  action  was  tried  before  the  Public 
Utilities  Commission  of  the  state  of  Kansas  which  in- 
volved the  question  of  the  closing  hour  for  freight  depots 
of  the  various  railroads  in  Topeka.  This  was  a  matter 
which  was  properly  before  the  Public  Utilities  Commis- 
sion, The  traffic  association  of  Topeka  was  demanding 
a  late  closing  hour  in  order  to  accommodate  the  shippers. 
The  railroad  companies  were  demanding  an  earlier  clos- 
ing hour  because  the  late  closing  hour  compelled  the  rail- 
roads to  pay  out  wages  for  overtime  work  to  employees 
under  federal  rules  then  existing. 

At  the  trial  of  the  case  a  man  in  overalls  appeared  who 
said  he  represented  the  freight  house  employees  who  were 
demanding  the  right  to  be  heard  in  their  own  behalf.  He 
said  that  the  late  closing  hour  was  objectionable  to  the 
workers  because  it  deprived  them  of  reasonable  recreation, 
social  privileges  and  time  for  association  with  their  fam- 
ilies. The  matter  was  continued  for  a  few  days  in  order 
that  the  working  people  might  present  their  evidence. 
The  case  was  decided  in  favor  of  the  laboring  people. 
The  following  paragraph  taken  from  the  decision  in  that 
case  states  the  ground  upon  which  it  rests  : 

"Now,  in  regard  to  the  claims  of  the  freight  handlers  and 
other  laboring  people,  who  are  directly  or  indirectly  affected 
by  the  closing  hour,  the  Commission  feels  that  there  is  much 
merit  in  their  contention,  and  this  really  is  the  matter  of 
prime  importance  in  this  controversy.    It  is  not  a  question  of 


APPENDIX  127 

the  eight-hour  day,  although  workers  are  desirous  of  observ- 
ing the  eight-hour  program;  it  is  not  a  question  of  the  ade- 
quacy of  the  wage  nor  of  the  conditions  surrounding  the 
worker.  It  is  largely  a  social  question.  The  custom  and 
practice  of  the  American  people  has  made  the  evening  hour 
the  hour  for  recreation,  for  self-improvement,  and  for  the 
family  circle.  Lectures,  concerts  and  religious  meetings  are 
held  during  the  evening  hours,  and  picture  shows  and  other 
places  of  amusement  and  recreation  are  kept  open  and  oper- 
ated during  the  evening  hours  and  not  at  other  hours  of  the 
day.  The  public  libraries  and  other  means  of  self-improve- 
ment are  available  at  the  evening  time.  In  the  family  the 
evening  hour  is  the  children's  hour.  The  gathering  darkness 
has  driven  them  in  from  their  play  to  the  house  and  to  the 
family  circle.  That  is  the  hour  in  which  the  children  are 
entitled  to  the  society  and  companionship  of  both  the  parents. 
To  deprive  the  children  of  this  privilege,  and  to  deprive  the 
parents  of  this  pleasure  and  of  this  opportunity  of  perform- 
ing their  parental  duty,  is  a  very  serious  matter  and  affects 
the  very  foundations  of  society.  It  is  a  matter  in  which  the 
entire  nation  is  interested." 

It  has  been  said  by  an  eminent  woman  welfare  worker 
that  this  paragraph  is  the  first  expression  of  any  public 
official,  committee,  commission,  court,  or  tribtmal,  having- 
authority  to  speak  upon  the  subject,  which  expressly  recog- 
nizes the  social  rights  of  laboring  people,  as  also  legal 
rights. 


IS  THERE  A  LABOR  PROBLEM  ? 

Speech  Before  the  Rotary  Club  at  Topeka,  Kan.,  October  30,  1919, 
By  W.  L.  HUGGINS 

"If  you  can  keep  your  head  when  all  about  you 
Are  losing  theirs  and  blaming  it  on  you, 
If  you  can  trust  yourself  when  all  men  doubt  you, 
But  make  allowance  for  their  doubting  too; 

If  you  can  talk  with  crowds  and  keep  your  virtue 
Or  walk  with  kings — nor  lose  the  common  touch; 
If  neither  foes  nor  loving  friends  can  hurt  you; 
If  all  men  count  with  you,  but  none  too  much; 
If  you  can  fill  each  unforgiving  minute 
With  sixty  seconds'  worth  of  distance  run, 
Yours  is  the  Earth  and  everything  that's  in  it, 
And — which  is  more — you'll  be  a  Man,  my  son!" 

It  would  seem  that  Kipling's  "If"  was  written  for  this 
especial  time  and  occasion.  From  eminent  authority  we 
learn  that,  in  the  early  stages  of  the  Peace  Conference, 
"Stones  were  clattering  upon  the  roof  and  wild  men  were 
shrieking  at  the  keyholes."  That  condition,  so  graphically 
described,  seems  to  prevail  at  this  time  all  over  the  United 
States  of  America.  Never  have  so  many  tremendously 
important  problems  presented  themselves  for  solution  at 
the  same  moment,  and  never  have  so  many  designing  de- 
moniacs busied  themselves  with  throwing  stones  nor  so 
many  wild  men  been  shrieking  through  the  keyholes.  It 
is  a  time  of  conflict  and  confusion,  worse  confounded.  It 
is  a  time  when  every  man  should  keep  his  head,  but,  never- 

128 


APPENDIX  129 

theless,  many  individuals,  high  placed,  are  shrieking  at  the 
keyholes,  predicting  revolution,  civil  war  and  dire  disaster, 
and  shouting,  "Hurry,  hurry,  hurry,"  at  the  few  sane  and 
sober  men  in  places  of  governmental  authority  who  realize 
that  study,  reflection,  cooperation  and  calm  judgment  are 
vitally  essential. 

I  am  asked  the  question,  "Is  there  a  labor  problem?" 
My  time  and  yours  forbids  that  I  enter  into  any  extended 
discussion  of  the  subject.  I  can  only  make  a  few  observa- 
tions. In  answer  to  the  question,  however,  I  will  slate 
that,  in  my  opinion,  the  industrial  crisis  now  upon  us  pre- 
sents the  most  momentous  problem  which  ever  confronted 
the  American  people.  If  we  fail  to  solve  it  by  peaceful 
and  lawful  means,  then,  and  in  that  event,  democracy  will 
have  failed.  However,  I  do  not  anticipate  a  revolution  or 
civil  war.  The  comforting  thought  comes  to  me  that,  in 
matters  of  government,  at  least,  we  are  an  Anglo-Saxon 
people  and  Anglo-Saxons  do  not  re-\o\ve ;  they  e-Yo\\Q. 

The  so-called  American  revolution  was  not,  in  fact,  a 
revolution.  It  was  merely  the  result  of  an  evolution 
toward  liberty  and  justice  which  had  been  progressing  in 
the  British  Isles  for  several  hundred  years.  A  number  of 
cultvired  and  courtly  gentlemen  wearing  knee  breeches, 
powdered  wigs  and  silver  buckles,  who  signed  the  famous 
document  declaring  that  all  men  were  created  free  and 
equal,  retained  their  human  slaves  without  any  seeming 
compunction  of  conscience.  The  American  people,  after 
this  so-called  revolution,  proceeded  under  the  same  form 
of  local  government  to  develop  a  system  of  laws  and  cus- 
toms founded  upon  the  English  common-law,  which  had 
been  evolved  out  of  the  experience  of  the  English-speaking 
peoples  for  centuries  before  that,  and  which  is  to  this  day 
the  fundamental  law  in  every  state  of  the  American  Union 
with  the  single  exception  of  Louisiana.  During  the  time 
that  this  peaceful  evolution  was  taking  place  among  the 


130  APPENDIX 

English-speaking  peoples,  only  a  few  miles  of  water  sepa- 
rated Britain  from  a  liberty-loving  people  who  were  gov- 
erned by  one  of  the  rottenest  monarchies  that  ever  existed 
on  the  European  continent,  and  who  in  their  revolutionary 
struggles  passed  from  monarchy  to  republic  and  from  re- 
public back  to  monarchy  so  many  times  that  the  average 
man  becomes  confused  in  studying  the  history.  The 
French  people  are  now  living  under  a  republican  form  of 
government  which  is  so  new  that  it  does  not  yet  appear 
whether  it  shall  be  permanent  or  ephemeral. 

We,  the  American  people,  must  evolve  a  lawful  solution 
of  this  constantly  recurring  industrial  condition  which  so 
vitally  affects  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  entire  coun- 
try and  of  every  class  of  our  citizens.  The  task  may  be, 
and  in  fact  we  know  will  be,  a  difficult  one,  but  it  must 
be  accomplished,  and  now  is  the  time  to  begin. 

When  the  responsible  head  of  an  almost  all-powerful 
industrial  trust  peremptorily  and  contemptuously  refuses 
to  meet  and  confer  with  representatives  of  employees  on 
matters  relating  to  wages  and  working  conditions  or  other 
matters  of  interest  to  such  employees,  when  he  refuses  to 
arbitrate  matters  in  dispute,  when  he  denies  the  right  of 
the  workingman  to  bargain  collectively,  he  commits  acts 
of  tyranny  which  should  not  be,  cannot  be,  and  will  not  be 
tolerated  any  longer  by  a  free  people. 

What  is  a  corporation  ?  A  corporation  is  a  collection  of 
individuals  who  combine  their  capital  and  their  efforts 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  on  some  enterprise  more  ad- 
vantageously than  it  could  be  done  by  individuals.  A 
corporation  does  its  business  collectively  through  its  offi- 
cers. It  bargains  with  its  customers  collectively  in  that 
way.  What  is  a  trust  in  the  sense  in  which  we  generally 
use  the  term  in  this  country  ?  A  trust  is  an  illegal  collec- 
tion or  combination  of  corporations  engaged  in  the  same 
line  of  business,  who  by  such  combination  expect  coUec- 


APPENDIX  131 

tively  to  carn^  on  said  business  more  efficiently  and  profit- 
ably ;  an  institution  which,  through  its  responsible  officers, 
bargains  collectively  for  its  component  parts.  Therefore, 
when  the  responsible  head  of  a  great  industry  denies  his 
workmen  the  right  of  collective  bargaimng,  he  claims  a 
privilege  for  his  class  which  he  arrogantly  denies  another 
and  equally  deserving  class.  The  American  colonies  sepa- 
rated themselves  from  the  British  empire  because  of  acts 
of  oppression  which  were  trivial  compared  with  that. 

On  the  other  hand,  when  the  duly  elected  representative 
of  a  great  labor  trust  presents  to  employers  demands, 
justifiable  or  unjustifiable,  and  couples  these  demands  with 
a  threat  that  if  his  requirements  are  not  promptly  com- 
plied with  he  will  call  out  on  strike  a  half  million  working- 
men  and  thereby  paralyze  industry  and  cause  incompar- 
able nation-wide  suffering  among  his  fellow  citizens,  he 
also  commits  an  act  of  tyranny  which  is  without  parallel 
in  the  history  of  free  governments,  and  one  which,  in  the 
new  industrial  code  which  we  must  have,  should  be  de- 
nominated "treason"  and  penalized  accordingly. 

Do  not  misunderstand  me,  however.  I  claim  that  we 
cannot  in  justice  take  away  the  workingman's  right  to 
strike  unless  and  until  we  give  him  a  better  means  of  de- 
fense. Under  present  conditions  he  has  no  other  weapon 
with  which  to  protect  himself  and  family.  The  law  of  the 
land  justifies  even  the  taking  of  human  life  in  defense  of 
self  or  family;  but  while  the  law  justifies  homicide  in  self- 
defense,  it  also  provides  courts,  peace  officers  and  an 
elaborate  code  of  criminal  laws  and  procedure,  all  for  the 
purpose  of  protecting  the  peace,  the  person  and  the  prop- 
erty of  the  individual,  and  of  providing  a  means  by  which 
violations  of  law  may  be  penalized.  Unfortunately,  in 
matters  of  industrial  disputes  and  disturbances,  no  such 
means  of  defense  or  redress  have,  as  yet,  been  presented. 

America  has  just  finished  fighting  in  a  great  war  for  the 


132  APPENDIX 

purpose  of  making  the  world  safe  for  democracy;  and 
we,  my  fellow  citizens,  have  not  been  altogether  noted  for 
our  modesty  when  we  talked  upon  the  prowess  of  Ameri- 
can armies  in  that  conflict.  Someone  has  said,  however, 
that  we  are  about  to  fight  again  to  make  democracy  safe 
for  the  world.  Just  now  we  are  in  the  midst  of  a  brutal 
and  destructive  industrial  war,  which  may  yet  prove,  if 
prompt  action  be  not  taken,  more  destructive  to  American 
life  and  property  and  cause  more  suffering  among  the 
American  people  than  was  caused  by  the  war  from  which 
we  have  just  emerged. 

I  can  speak  only  of  general  principles  and  not  of  specific 
causes.  It  is  urged  that  the  great  steel  strike  was  caused 
by  Bolshevist  agitators  preying  upon  the  credulity,  cupid- 
ity and  lawless  disposition  of  alien  workingmen.  If  those 
facts  be  established,  then  there  shovtld  be  more  room  pro- 
vided in  the  penitentiary  for  the  Bolshevist  and  more  room 
in  the  steerage  on  eastbound  ocean-going  vessels  for  the 
aliens.  But  that  does  not  dispose  of  the  principle  involved. 
Assuming  the  facts  to  be  as  indicated  above,  then  if  there 
never  had  been  a  Bolshevist,  socialist  or  alien  within  1,000 
miles  of  the  steel  plant;  if  the  workmen  had  all  been  100 
per  cent  American  citizens  as  we  find  organized  la])or  in 
Topeka,  Kan. ;  and  if  through  their  proper  representatives 
they  had  approached  the  heads  of  tliat  industry  with  a 
proposition  that  working  conditions,  wages,  hours  of  labor 
or  any  other  matter  of  vital  interest  to  the  workmen  should 
be  discussed  and  considered,  and  if  the  same  refusal  had 
been  made  in  the  same  way  by  the  heads  of  that  great  in- 
dustry, would  the  result  have  been  different?  Of  course 
not.  An  intolerable  condition  would  have  been  presented 
to  the  workers.  Yet  similar  conditions  and  questions  have 
existed  for  years.  It  is  a  chronic  case,  and  constantly 
growing  more  serious.  For  many  years  some  employers 
have  claimed  the  right  to  discharge  employees   for  the 


APPENDIX  133 

single  and  simple  fact  of  membership  in  labor  organiza- 
tions ;  and  for  many  years  union  men,  at  least  at  times,  and 
under  certain  conditions,  have  refused  to  allow  the  employ- 
ment of  nonunion  men  in  plants  in  which  union  men  were 
in  the  majority.  The  question  of  the  open  shop  or  the 
closed  shop  has  caused  in  this  land  of  ours  riots,  destruc- 
tion of  property,  and  even  loss  of  human  life.  Notwith- 
standing all  these  facts,  we  have  devised  no  means  of  cpn- 
trolling  such  situations.  If  two  obscure  citizens  have  a 
dispute  over  property  or  property  rights  of  the  value  of  a 
few  dollars,  either  one  of  the  disputants  may  compel  his 
adversary  to  come  into  the  courts  of  the  land  for  a  settle- 
ment of  the  dispute.  When  once  in  court,  even  though  the 
cost  to  the  state  may  be  ten  times  the  value  of  the  prop- 
erty in  dispute,  the  controversy  must  be  heard  and  ad- 
judicated. 

More  than  250  years  ago  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  of  Eng- 
land, later  lord  chief  justice,  wrote  what  has  been  called 
the  most  famous  paragraph  in  the  whole  law  relating  to 
public  service.     It  is  as  follows : 

"Whenever  the  king  or  a  subject  have  a  public  wharf  to 
which  all  persons  must  come,  who  come  to  that  port  to  unload 
their  goods,  in  that  case  there  cannot  be  taken  arbitrary 
and  excessive  duties  for  cranage,  wbarfage,  etc.,  but  tbe 
duties  must  be  reasonable  and  moderate,  for  now  tbe  wbarf 
and  crane  and  other  conveniences  are  affected  with  a  pubHc 
interest  and  they  cease  to  be  juris  prwati  only." 

The  principle  stated  by  Sir  Matthew  is  invoked  every 
time  a  complaint  is  lodged  with  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  or  any  of  the  state  public  utilities  commis- 
sions, in  which  citizens  complain  of  excessive  rates  by  rail- 
roads or  other  public-ser\^ice  concerns.  We  have  extended 
that  principle,  however.  We  are  not  now  content  with 
fixing  the  rates,  but  we  go  farther  and  compel  the  service. 
We  require  all  public  utility  concerns  to  serve  all  comers 


134  APPENDIX 

alike  and  to  continue  the  service.  We  do  not  permit,  for 
instance,  organized  capital,  owning  and  controlling  a 
railroad  system,  to  cease  operation  of  its  trains  because 
further  operation  may  be  considered  disadvantageous  to 
the  owners.  Why,  then,  should  we  permit  organized 
labor  by  striking,  to  cease  the  operation  of  trains  ?  Should 
not  capital  and  labor  be  treated  equally  ?  Each  are  equally 
essential  to  business. 

I  would  like  to  answer  my  own  question  by  saying  that 
there  is  a  reason,  and  only  one,  which  might  at  this  time,  in 
case  of  intolerable  conditions,  justify  organized  labor  in 
ceasing  operation,  by  means  of  strikes,  where  capital  is  not 
allowed  to  do  so.  That  reason  is  that  a  lawful  tribunal 
has  been  provided  before  which  capital  may  go  with  its 
grievances.  If  the  rates  are  too  low  or  the  burden  too 
onerous,  if  the  practices  required  by  the  public  are  un- 
reasonable, the  courts,  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commis- 
sion and  the  state  commissions  are  open  to  organized 
capital.  In  the  case  of  organized  labor  there  is  no  such 
tribunal.  Therefore,  if  I  were  permitted  to  vote  to 
adopt  or  reject  the  anti-strike  feature  in  the  Cummings 
bill,  I  would,  before  voting  to  support  it,  have  to  be 
absolutely  sure  that  an  adequate  remedy  is  provided 
whereby  labor  may  have  its  rights  and  wrongs  adjudi- 
cated and  settled  in  an  orderly  and  lawful  way  by  an 
impartial  tribunal. 

Why  should  there  be  no  lawful  means  for  the  adjudica- 
tion of  these  constantly  recurring  industrial  disputes, 
which  are  oftentimes  of  transcendant  importance?  It 
seems  to  me  that  it  is  time  for  the  American  people 
to  act  vigorously  in  this  matter.  We  should  no  longer 
depend  upon  that  type  of  politician  who  always  keeps 
his  ear  to  the  grass  roots.  We  should  demand  of  our 
public  men  real  leadership.  We  ought  to  stand  aggres- 
sively for  Anglo-Saxon  liberty,  which  means  liberty  regu- 


APPENDIX  135 

lated  by  law.  We  ought  to  demand  for  every  citizen 
Anglo-Saxon  justice,  which  means  even-handed  justice 
administered  by  lawfully  constituted  tribunals  according 
to  established  rules.  We  have  temporized  and  we  have 
tried  various  half-considered  and  poorly  devised  plans 
of  avoiding  strikes,  lockouts,  black  lists  and  the  boy- 
cott. We  have  not  succeeded.  In  my  humble  judgment 
we  will  never  succeed  until  we  strike  out  boldly  and  de- 
mand the  enactment  of  a  comprehensive  industrial  code 
of  laws  and  the  establishment  of  such  tribunals  as  may  be 
necessary  to  enforce  such  laws. 

It  may  be  that  our  present  court  system  will  answer. 
If  not,  then  additional  courts  should  be  established. 
There  should  be  courts,  not  commissions  nor  committees. 
These  disputes  should  be  adjudicated,  not  arbitrated. 
Arbitration  has  not  been  successful.  The  principle  of  ar- 
bitration is  not  right.  In  practice  it  usually  results  in  the 
choice  by  each  contestant  of  an  arbitrator  who  is 
thoroughly  committed  to  the  view  of  the  party  which 
chooses  him.  After  that  it  becomes  a  jockey  between  the 
two  as  who  shall  name  the  third  arbitrator.  In  many 
instances,  after  the  third  is  chosen,  you  might  as  well 
call  for  your  decision.  The  introduction  of  evidence 
or  the  argument  of  your  case  will  be  of  no  avail. 

It  is  dififerent  with  a  court.  A  court  is  a  continuous 
body.  All  its  proceedings  are  matters  of  public  record. 
Its  members  are  chosen  by  the  votes  of  the  people  or  by 
appointment  of  an  executive.  In  case  of  error,  ordinarily, 
an  appeal  can  be  had.  Respect  for  courts  is  thoroughly 
ingrained  into  the  nature  of  all  English-speaking  people. 
A  man  who  has  no  respect  for  the  courts  of  the  land,  of 
course  has  no  faith  in  any  human  institution.  Courts  for 
years  have  been  enforcing  their  decrees,  have  been  com- 
pelling the  attendance  of  witnesses  and  of  parties,  and 
have  been  administering  justice  to  the  general  satisfac- 


136  A  P  P  E  X  D  T  X 

tion  of  all  the  people.  It  is  the  glory  of  Anglo-Saxor 
jurisprudence,  first  that  it  affords  a  remedy  for  every 
wrong;  and  second,  that  through  its  instrumentalities 
justice  is  administered  impartially  and  in  accordance  with 
established  rules,  not  by  the  caprice  of  the  presiding 
judge. 

We  have  heretofore  made  feeble  attempts  toward  the 
establishment  of  industrial  justice  by  means  of  legislation. 
We  have  a  law  prohibiting  the  employment  of  young 
children  in  certain  lines  of  work.  We  have  a  law  fixing 
the  hours  of  labor  for  women  and  children,  and  a  mini- 
mum wage.  We  have  provided  for  the  inspection  of 
mines  and  factories,  and  for  the  enforcement  of  sanitary 
and  safety  precautions.  We  have  our  safety  appliance 
act.  We  have  laws  establisliing  free  employment  agen- 
cies under  certain  conditions  and  governing  the  activities 
of  commercial  employment  agencies.  We  have  our  work- 
men's compensation  act  in  many  of  the  states,  by  the 
terms  of  which,  in  Kansas  at  least,  we  specifically  name  a 
large  number  of  industries  and  employments  which  the 
law  arbitrarily  declares  to  be  extra  hazardous.  We  go 
farther  and  say  that  the  hazard  becomes  greater  as  the 
number  of  workmen  increases,  and  that,  therefore,  all 
persons,  firms  and  corporations  engaged  in  these  hazard- 
ous lines  of  industry,  who  employ  five  or  more  workmen, 
shall  be  within  the  provisions  of  this  act.  Then  we  tell 
the  employer  how  much  he  shall  pay  his  workmen  for 
the  loss  of  an  eye,  a  finger,  a  toe.  a  hand,  or  for  any 
other  injury  he  may  sustain  in  the  line  of  his  duties.  We 
tell  him  how  much  he  shall  pay  the  dependents  of  any 
laborer  who  may  lose  his  life  while  in  that  employment. 
We  have  other  laws  of  like  nature  too  numerous  to  men- 
tion here,  but  as  yet  we  have  no  law  by  the  terms  of 
which  such  an  industrial  dispute  as  has  recently  arisen 
between  the  steel  trust  and  its  employees,  between  the 


APPENDIX  137 

coal-mine  operators  and  their  employees  and  between 
railroad  companies  and  their  employees  can  be  adjudi- 
cated. 

The  new  industrial  code  should  provide  that  all  lines 
of  industry  whose  business  affects  the  production  or 
distribution  or  cost  of  the  necessaries  of  life  be  impressed 
with  a  public  interest,  because  they  afifect  the  entire 
public,  and  that  in  case  of  any  dispute  which  may  affect 
the  operation  of  such  industries,  the  matter  shall  be 
brought  into  court,  investigated  and  adjudicated.  The 
rights  of  each  individual  should  be  protected.  If  an  in- 
dividual desires  to  work  as  a  member  of  a  labor  union, 
that  fact  should  not  be  held  against  him.  If  he  desires  to 
go  it  alone  as  a  private  American  citizen,  that  fact  should 
not  be  against  him.  I  lis  rights  should  be  guaranteed  just 
the  same.  Every  labor  union  should  be  made  responsible 
by  taking  out  a  charter  or  by  some  other  means  provided 
by  law;  and  the  strike,  the  lockout,  the  boycott,  and  the 
black  list,  all  should  be  prohibited  and  penalized. 

Under  this  new  industrial  code  all  such  industries 
should  be  operated  continuously  unless  a  court  of  com- 
petent jurisdiction  should  find  just  cause  for  permitting  a 
discontinuance.  Why  should  the  coal  operators,  the 
meat  packers  or  the  manufacturers  of  flour  be  permitted 
to  curtail  production  in  order  to  increase  prices  any  more 
than  a  railroad  company  should  be  permitted  to  cease  the 
operation  of  a  portion  of  its  trains  in  order  to  increase 
freight  rates?  It  requires  but  a  very  moderate  exten- 
sion of  the  principle  announced  250  years  ago  by  old  Sir 
IViaithew  Hale,  when  he  said  that  even  the  king  must  be 
sunject  to  the  regulation  by  law  if  he  operated  a  public 
utility,  to  justify  a  legal  enactment  which  would  require 
all  these  various  industries,  whose  operations  affect  the 
living  conditions  of  the  American  people,  to  be  under 
the  supervision  of  courts  and  commissions  to  the  same 


138  APPENDIX 

extent  as  common  carriers  and  other  public  utilities  are 
today.  Correspondingly,  it  requires  a  very  meager  ex- 
tension of  that  same  principle  to  make  proper  legal  re- 
quirements which  prevent  organized  labor  from  hinder- 
ing, delaying  or  in  any  way  restricting  the  operations 
of  such  industries  so  affecting  living  conditions  of  the 
American  people. 

But  some  will  say  we  can't  compel  a  man  to  work  in 
these  various  industries.  Well,  we  have  never  tried  to 
compel  capital  to  invest  in  them,  have  we?  But  capital 
seeks  investment  and  labor  will  seek  employment.  Let 
labor  be  assured  of  a  fair  and  able  tribunal  before  which 
it  can  always  appear  to  have  its  rights  protected,  and 
labor,  at  least  so  far  as  it  represents  American  citizenship, 
will  gladly  give  up  the  strike,  the  boycott  and  other  indus- 
trial weapons  which  it  has  been  using  with  such  poor 
results. 

I  am  mindful  of  the  fact  that  some  of  the  representa- 
tives of  organized  capital,  in  times  past,  and  more  recently 
some  of  the  dignitaries  of  organized  labor,  have  so  far 
lost  their  heads  as  to  declare  that  they  would  not  obey 
the  laws  of  Congress  or  the  decrees  of  the  courts  of  the 
land.  I  would  advise  those  egotistic  gentlemen  to  take 
sober  counsel  before  they  proceed  to  carry  out  these  Fal- 
staffian  boasts. 

These  worthies  who  are  announcing  that  they  will  not 
obey  the  laws  of  the  land  might  take  advice  from  some  of 
their  kindred  spirits  who  defied  the  draft  law,  or  who  re- 
fused allegiance  to  the  government  of  the  United  States 
during  the  late  unpleasantness.  They  might  learn  some- 
thing of  value  to  them  by  inquiring  of  the  officers  and 
members  of  the  more  or  less  lamented  whisky  trust,  or 
they  might  enter  one  of  the  elegant  barrooms  in  the  erst- 
while wet  district  and  inquire  of  the  disconsolate,  dis- 


APPENDIX  139 

couraged  and  dejected-looking  gentleman  behind  the  bar, 
as  he  mixes  lemonades  and  pours  out  ginger  ale,  and 
find  out  what  he  thinks  is  the  best  thing  to  do  when 
Uncle  Sam  speaks.  Or,  if  not  satisfied  with  that  kind  of 
advice,  there  is  a  bent  and  haggard  old  wood  sawyer 
over  in  Holland  who  could  tell  them  what  happens  to  a 
man  who  boasts  that  he  will  stand  for  no  foolishness  from 
the  United  States  of  America. 

Is  there  a  labor  problem?  No.  We  minimize  its  im- 
portance if  we  call  it  a  labor  problem.  It  is  an  indus- 
trial problem  of  a  nature  so  serious  that  it  vitally  affects 
every  man,  woman  and  child  under  the  flag.  In  going 
about  its  solution  we  should  keep  our  hearts  warm  and 
our  heads  cool.  It  must  be  solved  according  to  lawful 
formulas.  In  our  country  the  law  is  supreme.  But  the 
law  should  also  be  just.  Every  American  citizen  must 
have  the  opportunity  to  provide  himself  and  his  family 
with  a  decent  and  comfortable  home,  wholesome  food  and 
clothing,  and  means  of  moral  and  intellectual  advancement. 
To  that  end  wages  of  labor,  as  well  as  returns  upon 
capital,  must  be  protected  by  law.  We  have  dethroned 
King  Alcohol.  His  tyranny  and  his  power  are  ended. 
That  accomplished,  we  ought  to  be  able  within  this  gener- 
ation to  abolish  the  unsanitary  tenement  and  the  ragged 
hovel,  and  give  to  every  child  born  under  the  stars  and 
stripes  a  real  home. 

During  the  past  five  years  we  have  learned  beyond  the 
peradventure  of  a  doubt  that  in  time  of  crisis  the  Ameri- 
can people,  with  practical  unanimity,  will  support  their 
government  to  the  extreme  limit.  Our  enemies  have 
learned  that  fact  to  their  sorrow. 

A  story  is  told  of  one  of  Napoleon's  soldiers  who  had 
been  wounded  in  the  breast,  that  he  said  to  the  surgeon 
treating  his  wound,  "Cut  a  little  deeper,  sir,  and  you  will 


I40  APPENDIX 

find  the  image  of  my  emperor."  Gentlemen,  within  the 
deepest  recesses  of  the  soul  of  the  average  American 
citizen  will  be  found  indelibly  impressed  a  monogram 
which,  when  deciphered,  is  found  to  be  composed  of  three 
magic  letters — U.  S.  A. 


THE  KANSAS  INDUSTRIAL  ACT 

BE  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  Kansas: 
Section  i.  There  is  hereby  created  a  tribunal  to  be 
known  as  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  which  shall 
be  composed  of  three  judges  who  shall  be  appointed  by 
the  governor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
Senate.  Of  such  three  judges  first  appointed,  one  shall 
be  appointed  for  a  term  of  one  year,  one  for  a  term  of  two 
years,  and  one  for  a  term  of  three  years,  said  terms  to  be- 
gin simultaneously  upon  qualification  of  the  persons  ap- 
pointed therefor.  Upon  the  expiration  of  the  term  of  the 
three  judges  first  appointed  as  aforesaid,  each  succeeding 
judge  shall  be  appointed  and  shall  hold  his  office  for  a 
term  of  three  years  and  until  his  successor  shall  have  been 
qualified.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the  office  of  judge 
of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  the  governor  shall 
appoint  his  successor  to  fill  the  vacancy  for  the  unexpired 
term.  The  salary  of  each  of  said  judges  shall  be  five 
thousand  dollars  per  year,  payable  monthly.  Of  the 
judges  first  to  be  appointed,  the  one  appointed  for  the 
three-^year  term  shall  be  the  presiding  judge,  and  thereafter 
the  judge  whose  term  of  service  has  been  the  longest  shall 
be  the  presiding  judge :  Provided,  That  in  case  two  or 
more  of  said  judges  shall  have  served  the  same  length 
of  time,  the  presiding  judge  shall  be  designated  by  the 
governor. 

Sec.  2.  (a)  The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall 
have  such  power,  authority  and  jurisdiction,  and  shall  per- 
form such  duties  as  are  in  this  act  set  forth, 

141 


142  A  r  P  E  N  D  I  X 

(b)  In  any  matter  pending  before  the  Court  of  Indus- 
trial Relations,  if  it  shall  be  brought  to  the  attention  of 
such  court  that  there  is  a  matter  pending  before  the  Public 
Utilities  Commission  in  relation  to  the  rate  charged  by  the 
employer,  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  may  order 
such  matters  to  be  heard  and  determined  at  the  same  time 
by  such  commission  and  Court  of  Industrial  Relations, 
sitting  as  one  body,  the  presiding  judge  of  said  Court  of 
Industrial  Relations  presiding,  and  in  case  of  a  tie  vote, 
the  presiding  judge  of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations 
shall  cast  an  additional  vote. 

Sec.  3.  (a)  The  operation  of  the  following  named 
and  indicated  employments,  industries,  public  utilities 
and  common  carriers  is  hereby  determined  and  declared 
to  be  affected  with  a  public  interest  and  therefore  subject 
to  supervision  by  the  state  as  herein  provided  for  the 
purpose  of  preserving  the  public  peace,  protecting  the 
public  health,  preventing  industrial  strife,  disorder  and 
waste,  and  securing  regular  and  orderly  conduct  of  the 
businesses  directly  affecting  the  living  conditions  of  the 
people  of  this  state  and  in  the  promotion  of  the  general 
welfare,  to-wit:  (i)  The  manufacture  or  preparation  of 
food  products  whereby,  in  any  stage  of  the  process,  sub- 
stances are  being  converted,  either  partially  or  wholly, 
from  their  natural  state  to  a  condition  to  be  used  as  food 
for  human  beings;  (2)  The  manufacture  of  clothing 
and  all  manner  of  wearing  apparel  in  common  use  by  the 
people  of  this  state  whereby,  in  any  stage  of  the  process, 
natural  products  are  being  converted,  either  partially  or 
wholly,  from  their  natural  state  to  a  condition  to  be  used 
as  such  clothing  and  wearing  apparel;  (3)  The  mining 
or  production  of  any  substance  or  material  in  common  use 
as  fuel  either  for  domestic,  manufacturing,  or  transporta- 
tion purposes ;  (4)  The  transportation  of  all  food  products 
and  articles  or  substances  entering  into  wearing  apparel. 


APPENDIX  143 

or  fuel,  as  aforesaid,  from  the  place  where  produced  to 
the  place  of  manufacture  or  consumption;  (5)  All  public 
utilities  as  defined  by  section  8329,  and  all  common  car- 
riers as  defined  by  section  8330  of  the  General  Statutes 
of  Kansas  of  1915. 

(b)  Any  person,  firm  or  corporation  engaged  in  any 
such  industry  or  employment,  or  in  the  operation  of  such 
public  utility  or  common  carrier,  within  the  state  of 
Kansas,  either  in  the  capacity  of  owner,  officer,  or  worker, 
shall  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  act,  except  as 
limited  by  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

Sec.  4.  Said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall  have 
its  office  at  the  capital  of  said  state  in  the  city  of  Topeka, 
and  shall  keep  a  record  of  all  its  proceedings  which  shall 
be  a  public  record  and  subject  to  inspection  the  same  as 
other  public  records  of  this  state.  Said  court,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  powers  and  jurisdiction  heretofore  conferred 
upon,  and  exercised  by,  the  Public  Utilities  Commission, 
is  hereby  given  full  power,  authority  and  jurisdiction  to 
supervise,  direct  and  control  the  operation  of  the  indus- 
tries, employments,  public  utilities,  and  common  carriers 
in  all  matters  herein  specified  and  in  the  manner  provided 
herein,  and  to  do  all  things  needful  for  the  proper  and  ex- 
peditious enforcement  of  all  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

Sec.  5.  Said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  is  hereby 
granted  full  power  to  adopt  all  reasonable  and  proper 
rules  and  regulations  to  govern  its  proceedings,  the  service 
of  process,  to  administer  oaths,  and  to  regulate  the  mode 
and  manner  of  all  its  investigations,  inspections  and  hear- 
ings :  Provided,  however,  That  in  the  taking  of  testimony 
the  rules  of  evidence,  as  recognized  by  the  supreme  court 
of  the  state  of  Kansas  in  original  proceedings  therein, 
shall  be  observed  by  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations; 
and  testimony  so  taken  shall  in  all  cases  be  transcribed  by 
the  reporter  for  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  in  du- 


144  APPENDIX 

plicate,  one  copy  of  said  testimony  to  be  filed  among  the 
permanent  records  of  said  court,  and  the  other  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  said  supreme  court  in  case  the  matter  shall  be 
taken  to  said  supreme  court  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act. 

Sec.  6.  It  is  hereby  declared  and  determined  to  be 
necessary  for  the  public  peace,  health  and  general  welfare 
of  the  people  of  this  state  that  the  industries,  employ- 
ments, public  utilities  and  common  carriers  herein  speci- 
fied shall  be  operated  with  reasonable  continuity  and 
efficiency  in  order  that  the  people  of  this  state  may  live  in 
peace  and  security,  and  be  supplied  with  the  necessaries  of 
life.  No  person,  firm,  corporation,  or  association  of 
persons  shall  in  any  manner  or  to  any  extent,  willfully 
hinder,  delay,  limit  or  suspend  such  continuous  and 
efficient  operation  for  the  purpose  of  evading  the  pur- 
pose and  intent  of  the  provisions  of  this  act ;  nor  shall  any 
person,  firm,  corporation,  or  association  of  persons  do 
any  act  or  neglect  or  refuse  to  perform  any  duty  herein 
enjoined  with  the  intent  to  hinder,  delay,  limit  or  suspend 
such  continuous  and  efficient  operation  as  aforesaid, 
except  under  the  terms  and  conditions  provided  by  this 
act. 

Sec.  7.  In  case  of  a  controversy  arising  between  em- 
ployers and  workers,  or  between  groups  or  crafts  of 
workers,  engaged  in  any  of  said  industries,  employments, 
public  utilities,  or  common  carriers,  if  it  shall  appear  to 
said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  that  said  controversy 
may  endanger  the  continuity  or  efficiency  of  service  of  any 
of  said  industries,  employments,  public  utilities  or  com- 
mon carriers,  or  affect  the  production  or  transportation 
of  the  necessaries  of  life  affected  or  produced  by  said  in- 
dustries or  employments,  or  produce  industrial  strife,  dis- 
order or  waste,  or  endanger  the  orderly  operation  of  such 
industries,  employments,  public  utilities  or  common  car- 


APPENDIX  145 

riers,  and  thereby  endanger  the  pubHc  peace  or  threaten 
the  public  health,  full  power,  authority  and  jurisdiction 
are  hereby  granted  to  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations, 
upon  its  own  initiative,  to  summon  all  necessary  parties 
before  it  and  to  investigate  said  controversy,  and  to  make 
such  temporary  findings  and  orders  as  may  be  necessary 
to  preserve  the  public  peace  and  welfare  and  to  preserve 
and  protect  the  status  of  the  parties,  property  and  public 
interests  involved  pending  said  investigations,  and  to  take 
evidence  and  to  examine  all  necessary  records,  and  to 
investigate  conditions  surrounding  the  workers,  and  to 
consider  the  wages  paid  to  labor  and  the  return  accruing 
to  capital,  and  the  rights  and  welfare  of  the  public,  and 
all  other  matters  affecting  the  conduct  of  said  industries, 
employments,  public  utilities  or  common  carriers,  and  to 
settle  and  adjust  all  such  controversies  by  such  findings 
and  orders  as  provided  in  this  act.  It  is  further  made  the 
duty  of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  upon  complaint 
of  either  party  to  such  controversy,  or  upon  complaint 
of  any  ten  citizen  taxpayers  of  the  community  in  which 
such  industries,  employments,  public  utilities  or  common 
carriers  are  located,  or  upon  the  complaint  of  the  attor- 
ney-general of  the  state  of  Kansas,  if  it  shall  be  made  to 
appear  to  said  court  that  the  parties  are  unable  to  agree 
and  that  such  controversy  may  endanger  the  continuity  or 
efficiency  of  service  of  any  of  said  industries,  employ- 
ments, public  utilities  or  common  carriers,  or  affect  the 
production  or  transportation  of  the  necessaries  of  life 
affected  or  produced  by  said  industries  or  employments, 
or  produce  industrial  strife,  disorder  or  waste,  or  en- 
danger the  orderly  operation  of  such  industries,  employ- 
ments, public  utilities  or  common  carriers,  and  thereby  en- 
danger the  public  peace  or  threaten  the  public  health,  to 
proceed  and  investigate  and  determine  said  controversy 
in  the  same  manner  as  though  upon  its  own  initiative. 


146  APPENDIX 

After  the  conclusion  of  any  such  hearing  and  investiga- 
tion, and  as  expeditiously  as  possible,  said  Court  of  In- 
dustrial Relations  shall  make  and  serve  upon  all  interested 
parties  its  findings,  stating  specifically  the  terms  and  con- 
ditions upon  which  said  industry,  employment,  utility  or 
common  carrier  should  be  thereafter  conducted  insofar 
as  the  matters  determined  by  said  court  are  concerned. 

Sec.  8,  The  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall  order 
such  changes,  if  any,  as  are  necessary  to  be  made  in  and 
about  the  conduct  of  said  industry,  employment,  utility 
or  common  carrier,  in  the  matters  of  working  and  living 
condition,  hours  of  labor,  rules  and  practices,  and  a 
reasonable  minimum  wage,  or  standard  of  wages,  to  con- 
form to  the  findings  of  the  court  in  such  matters,  as  pro- 
vided in  this  act,  and  such  orders  shall  be  served  at  the 
same  time  and  in  the  same  manner  as  provided  for  the  ser- 
vice of  the  court's  findings  in  this  act :  Provided,  All  such 
terms,  conditions  and  wages  shall  be  just  and  reasonable 
and  such  as  to  enable  such  industries,  employments,  utili- 
ties or  common  carriers  to  continue  with  reasonable  effi- 
ciency to  produce  or  transport  their  products  or  continue 
their  operations  and  thus  to  promote  the  general  welfare. 
Service  of  such  order  shall  be  made  in  the  same  manner  as 
service  of  notice  of  any  hearing  before  said  court  as 
provided  by  this  act.  Such  terms,  conditions,  rules, 
practices,  wages,  or  standard  of  wages,  so  fixed  and  de- 
termined by  said  court  and  stated  in  said  order,  shall  con- 
tinue for  such  reasonable  time  as  may  be  fixed  by  said 
court,  or  until  changed  by  agreement  of  the  parties  with 
the  approval  of  the  court.  If  either  party  to  such  con- 
troversy shall  in  good  faith  comply  with  any  order  of  said 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  for  a  period  of  sixty  days 
or  more,  and  shall  find  said  order  unjust,  unreasonable 
or  impracticable,  said  party  may  apply  to  said  Court  of 
Industrial  Relations  for  a  modification  thereof  and  said 


APPENDIX  147 

Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall  hear  and  determine 
said  application  and  make  findings  and  orders  in  like  man- 
ner and  with  like  effect  as  originally.  In  such  case  the 
evidence  taken  and  submitted  in  the  original  hearing  may 
be  considered. 

Sec.  9.  It  is  hereby  declared  necessary  for  the  promo- 
tion of  the  general  welfare  that  workers  engaged  in  any 
of  said  industries,  employments,  utilities  or  common  car- 
riers shall  receive  at  all  times  a  fair  wage  and  have  health- 
ful and  moral  surroundings  while  engaged  in  such  laljor ; 
and  that  capital  invested  therein  shall  receive  at  all  times 
a  fair  rate  of  return  to  the  owners  thereof.  The  right  of 
every  person  to  make  his  own  choice  of  employment  and 
to  make  and  carry  out  fair,  just  and  reasonable  contracts 
and  agreements  of  employment,  is  hereby  recognized.  If. 
during  the  continuance  of  any  such  employment,  the  terms 
or  conditions  of  any  such  contract  or  agreement  here- 
after entered  into,  are  by  said  court,  in  any  action  or  pro- 
ceeding properly  before  it  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act,  found  to  be  unfair,  unjust  or  unreasonable,  said  Court 
of  Industrial  Relations  may  by  proper  order  so  modify  the 
terms  and  conditions  thereof  so  that  they  will  be  and  re- 
main fair,  just  and  reasonable  and  all  such  orders  shall  be 
enforced  as  in  this  act  provided. 

Sec.  10.  Before  any  hearing,  trial  or  investigation  shall 
be  held  by  said  court,  such  notice  as  the  court  shall  deem 
necessary  shall  be  given  to  all  parties  interested  by  regis- 
tered U.  S.  mail  addressed  to  said  parties  to  the  post 
office  of  the  usual  place  of  residence  or  business  of  said 
interested  parties  when  same  is  known,  or  by  the  publica- 
tion of  notice  in  some  newspaper  of  general  circulation 
in  the  county  in  which  said  industry  or  employment,  or  the 
principal  office  of  such  utility  or  common  carrier  is 
located,  and  said  notice  shall  fix  the  time  and  place  of 
said  investigation  or  hearing.     The  costs  of  publication 


148  APPENDIX 

shall  be  paid  by  said  court  out  of  any  funds  available 
therefor.  Such  notice  shall  contain  the  substance  of  the 
matter  to  be  investigated,  and  shall  notify  all  persons 
interested  in  said  matter  to  be  present  at  the  time  and 
place  named  to  give  such  testimony  or  to  take  such  action 
as  they  may  deem  proper. 

Sec.  II.  Said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  may  em- 
ploy a  competent  clerk,  marshal,  shorthand  reporter,  and 
such  expert  accountants,  engineers,  stenographers,  attor- 
neys and  other  employees  as  may  be  necessary  to  conduct 
the  business  of  said  court ;  shall  provide  itself  with  a  proper 
seal  and  shall  have  the  power  and  authority  to  issue  sum- 
mons and  subpoenas  and  compel  the  attendance  of  wit- 
nesses and  parties  and  to  compel  the  production  of  the 
books,  correspondence,  files,  records,  and  accounts  of  any 
industry,  employment,  utility  or  common  carrier,  or  of  any 
person,  corporation,  association  or  union  of  employees 
afifected,  and  to  make  any  and  all  investigations  necessary 
to  ascertain  the  truth  in  regard  to  said  controversy.  In 
case  any  person  shall  fail  or  refuse  to  obey  any  summons 
or  subpoena  issued  by  said  court  after  due  service  then 
and  in  that  event  said  court  is  hereby  authorized  and 
empowered  to  take  proper  proceedings  in  any  court  of 
competent  jurisdiction  to  compel  obedience  to  such  sum- 
mons or  subpoena.  Employees  of  said  court  whose  sala- 
ries are  not  fixed  by  law  shall  be  paid  such  compensation 
as  may  be  fixed  by  said  court,  with  the  approval  of  the 
governor. 

Sec.  12.  In  case  of  the  failure  or  refusal  of  either 
party  to  said  controversy  to  obey  and  be  governed  by  the 
order  of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  then  and  in 
that  event  said  court  is  hereby  authorized  to  bring  proper 
proceedings  in  the  supreme  court  of  the  state  of  Kansas 
to  compel  compliance  with  said  order;  and  in  case  either 
party  to  said  controversy  should  feel  aggrieved  at  any 


APPENDIX  149 

order  made  and  entered  by  said  Court  of  Industrial  Re- 
lations, such  party  is  hereby  authorized  and  empowered 
within  ten  days  after  service  of  such  order  upon  it  to 
bring  proper  proceedings  in  the  supreme  court  of  the  state 
of  Kansas  to  compel  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations 
to  make  and  enter  a  just,  reasonable  and  lawful  order  in 
the  premises.  In  case  of  such  proceedings  in  the  su- 
preme court  by  either  party,  the  evidence  produced  before 
said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  may  be  considered  by 
said  supreme  court,  but  said  supreme  court,  if  it  deem 
further  evidence  necessary  to  enable  it  to  render  a  just 
and  proper  judgment,  may  admit  such  additional  evi- 
dence in  open  court  or  order  it  taken  and  transcribed  by 
a  master  or  commissioner.  In  case  any  controversy  shall 
be  taken  by  either  party  to  the  supreme  court  of  the  state 
of  Kansas  under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  said  proceed- 
ings shall  take  precedence  over  other  civil  cases  before 
said  court,  and  a  hearing  and  determination  of  the  same 
shall  be  by  said  court  expedited  as  fully  as  may  be  possible 
consistent  with  a  careful  and  thorough  trial  and  considera- 
tion of  said  matter. 

Sec.  13.  No  action  or  proceeding  in  law  or  equity  shall 
be  brought  by  any  person,  firm  or  corporation  to  vacate, 
set  aside,  or  suspend  any  order  made  and  served  as  pro- 
vided in  this  act,  unless  such  action  or  proceeding  shall  be 
commenced  within  thirty  days  from  the  time  the  service 
of  such  order. 

Sec.  14.  Any  union  or  association  of  workers  engaged 
in  the  operation  of  such  industries,  employments,  public 
utilities  or  common  carriers,  which  shall  incorporate 
under  the  laws  of  this  state  shall  be  by  said  Court  of  In- 
dustrial Relations  considered  and  recognized  in  all  its  pro- 
ceedings as  a  legal  entity  and  may  appear  before  said 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  through  and  by  its  proper 
officers,  attorneys  or  other  representatives.     The  right 


150  APPENDIX 

of  such  corporations,  and  of  such  unincorporated  unions 
or  associations  of  workers,  to  bargain  collectively  for  their 
members  is  hereby  recognized :  Provided,  That  the  indi- 
vidual members  of  such  unincorporated  unions  or  asso- 
ciations, who  shall  desire  to  avail  themselves  of  such  right 
of  collective  bargaining,  shall  appoint  in  writing  some 
officer  or  officers  of  such  union  or  association,  or  some 
other  person  or  persons  as  their  agents  or  trustees  with 
authority  to  enter  into  such  collective  bargains  and  to  rep- 
resent each  and  every  of  said  individuals  in  all  matters 
relating  thereto.  Such  written  appointment  of  agents  or 
trustees  shall  be  made  a  permanent  record  of  such 
union  or  association.  All  such  collective  bargains,  con- 
tracts, or  agreements  shall  be  subject  to  the  provisions  of 
section  nine  of  this_act. 

Sec.  15.  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  firm  or 
corporation  to  discharge  any  employee  or  to  discriminate 
in  any  way  against  any  employee  because  of  the  fact  that 
any  such  employee  may  testify  as  a  witness  before  the 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  or  shall  sign  any  complaint 
or  shall  be  in  any  way  instrumental  in  bringing  to  the  at- 
tention of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  any  matter  of 
controversy  between  employers  and  employees  as  provided 
herein.  It  shall  also  be  milawful  for  any  two  or  more  per- 
sons, by  conspiring  or  confederating  together,  to  injure  in 
any  manner  any  other  person  or  persons,  or  any  corpora- 
tion, in  his,  their,  or  its  business,  labor,  enterprise,  or  peace 
and  security,  by  boycott,  by  discrimination,  by  picketing, 
by  advertising,  by  propaganda,  or  other  means,  because  of 
any  action  taken  by  such  person  or  persons,  or  any  cor- 
poration, under  any  order  of  said  court,  or  because 
of  any  action  or  proceeding  instituted  in  said  court,  or 
because  any  such  person  or  persons,  or  corporation,  shall 
have  invoked  the  jurisdiction  of  said  court  in  any  matter 
provided  for  herein. 


APPENDIX  151 

Sec.  16.  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  firm,  or 
corporation  engaged  in  the  operation  of  any  such  industry, 
employment,  utility,  or  common  carrier  willfully  to  limit 
or  cease  operations  for  the  purpose  of  limiting  production 
or  transportation  or  to  affect  prices,  for  the  puq^ose  of 
avoiding  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act;.l)ut  any  person, 
firm  or  corporation  so  engaged  may  apply  to  said  Court 
of  Industrial  Relations  for  authority  to  limit  or  cease  oper-' 
ations,  stating  the  reasons  therefor,  and  said  Court  of  In- 
dustrial Relations  shall  hear  said  application  promptly, 
and  if  said  application  shall  be  found  to  be  in  good  faith 
and  meritorious,  authority  to  limit  or  cease  operations  shall 
be  granted  by  order  of  said  court.  In  all  such  industries, 
employments,  utilities  or  common  carriers  in  which  opera- 
tion may  be  ordinarily  affected  by  changes  in  season, 
market  conditions,  or  other  reasons  or  causes  inherent  in 
the  nature  of  the  business,  said  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions may,  upon  application  and  after  notice  to  all  inter- 
ested parties,  and  investigation,  as  herein  provided,  make 
orders  fixing  rules,  regulations  and  practices  to  govern  the 
operation  of  such  industries,  employments,  utilities  or 
common  carriers  for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  best 
service  to  the  public  consistent  with  the  rights  of  employ- 
ers and  employees  engaged  in  the  operation  of  such  in- 
dustries, employments,  utilities  or  common  carriers. 

Sec.  17.  It  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  person,  firm  or 
corporation,  or  for  any  association  of  persons,  to  do  or 
perform  any  act  forbidden,  or  to  fail  or  refuse  to  perform 
any  act  or  duty  enjoined  by  the  provisions  of  this  act,  or 
to  conspire  or  confederate  with  others  to  do  or  perform 
any  act  forbidden,  or  to  fail  or  refuse  to  perform  any  act 
or  duty  enjoined  by  the  provisions  of  this  act,  or  to  induce 
or  intimidate  any  persons,  firm  or  corporation  engaged  in 
any  of  said  industries,  employments,  utilities  or  common 
carriers  to  do  any  act  forbidden,  or  to  fail  or  refuse  to 


152  APPENDIX 

perform  any  act  or  duty  enjoined  by  the  provisions  of  this 
act,  for  the  purpose  or  with  the  intent  to  hinder,  delay, 
limit,  or  suspend  the  operation  of  any  of  the  industries, 
employments,  utilities  or  common  carriers  herein  specified 
or  indicated,  or  to  delay,  limit,  or  suspend  the  production 
or  transportation  of  the  products  of  such  industries,  or 
employments,  or  the  service  of  such  utilities  or  common 
carriers:  Provided,  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  con- 
strued as  restricting  the  right  of  any  individual  employee 
engaged  in  the  operation  of  any  such  industry,  employ- 
ment, public  utility,  or  common  carrier  to  quit  his  employ- 
ment at  any  time,  but  it  shall  be  unlawful  for  any  such 
individual  employee  or  other  person  to  conspire  with  other 
persons  to  quit  their  employment  or  to  induce  other  per- 
sons to  quit  their  employment  for  the  purpose  of  hinder- 
ing, delaying,  interfering  with,  or  suspending  the  opera- 
tion of  any  of  the  industries,  employments,  public  utili- 
ties, or  common  carriers  governed  by  the  provisions  of  this 
act,  or  for  any  person  to  engage  in  what  is  known  as  "pick- 
eting," or  to  intimidate  by  threats,  abuse,  or  in  any  other 
manner,  any  person  or  persons  with  intent  to  induce  such 
person  or  persons  to  quit  such  employment,  or  for  the  pur- 
pose of  deterring  or  preventing  any  other  person  or  per- 
sons from  accepting  employment  or  from  remaining  in 
the  employ  of  any  of  the  industries,  employments,  public 
utilities,  or  common  carriers  governed  by  the  provisions 
of  this  act. 

Sec.  18.  Any  person  willfully  violating  the  provisions 
of  this  act,  or  any  valid  order  of  said  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and 
upon  conviction  thereof  in  any  court  of  competent  juris- 
diction of  this  state  shall  be  punished  by  a  fine  of  not  to 
exceed  $1,000,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  county  jail  for  a 
period  of  not  to  exceed  one  year,  or  by  both  such  fine  and 
imprisonment. 


APPENDIX  153 

Sec.  19.  Any  officer  of  any  corporation  engaged  in  any 
of  the  industries,  employments,  utilities  or  common  car- 
riers herein  named  and  specified,  or  any  officer  of  any 
labor  union  or  association  of  persons  engaged  as  workers 
in  any  such  industry,  employment,  utility  or  common  car- 
rier, or  any  employer  of  labor,  coming  within  the  provi- 
sions of  this  act,  who  shall  willfully  use  the  power,  author- 
ity or  influence  incident  to  his  official  position,  or  to  his 
position  as  an  employer  of  others,  and  Ijy  such  means  shall 
intentionally  influence,  impel,  or  compel  any  other  person 
to  violate  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  act,  or  any  valid 
order  of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  felony  and  upon  conviction  thereof  in 
any  court  of  competent  jurisdiction  shall  be  punished  by  a 
fine  not  to  exceed  $5,000,  or  by  imprisonment  in  the  state 
penitentiary  at  hard  labor  for  a  term  not  to  exceed  two 
years,  or  by  both  such  fine  and  imprisonment. 

Sec.  20.  In  case  of  the  suspension,  limitation  or  cessa- 
tion of  the  operation  of  any  of  the  industries,  employ- 
ments, public  utilities  or  common  carriers  aflfected  by  this 
act,  contrary  to  the  provisions  hereof,  or  to  the  orders  of 
said  court  made  hereunder,  if  it  shall  appear  to  said  court 
that  such  suspension,  limitation,  or  cessation  shall  seri- 
ously afifect  the  public  welfare  by  endangering  the  public 
peace,  or  threatening  the  public  health,  then  said  court  is 
hereby  authorized,  empowered  and  directed  to  take  proper 
proceedings  in  any  court  of  competent  jurisdiction  of  this 
state  to  take  over,  control,  direct  and  operate  said  indus- 
try, employment,  public  utility  or  common  carrier  during 
such  emergency:  Provided,  That  a  fair  return  and  com- 
pensation shall  be  paid  to  the  owners  of  such  industry, 
employment,  public  utility  or  common  carrier,  and  also  a 
fair  wage  to  the  workers  engaged  therein,  during  the  time 
of  such  operation  under  the  provisions  of  this  section. 

Sec.  21.     When  any  controversy  shall  arise  between 


154  APPENDIX 

employer  and  employee  as  to  wages,  hours  of  employment, 
or  working  or  living  conditions,  in  any  industry  not  here- 
inbefore specified,  the  parties  to  such  controversy  may, 
by  mutual  agreement,  and  with  the  consent  of  the  court, 
refer  the  same  to  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  for  its 
findings  and  orders.  Such  agreement  of  reference  shall 
be  in  writing,  signed  by  the  parties  thereto;  whereupon 
said  court  shall  proceed  to  investigate,  hear,  and  determine 
said  controversy  as  in  other  cases,  and  in  such  case  the 
findings  and  orders  of  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations 
as  to  said  controversy  shall  have  the  same  force  and  effect 
as  though  made  in  any  essential  industry  as  herein  pro- 
vided. 

Sec.  22.  Whenever  deemed  necessary  by  the  Court  of 
Industrial  Relations,  the  court  may  appoint  such  person, 
or  persons,  having  a  technical  knowledge  of  bookkeeping, 
engineering,  or  other  technical  subjects  involved  in  any 
inquiry  in  which  the  court  is  engaged,  as  a  commissioner 
for  the  purpose  of  taking  evidence  with  relation  to  such 
subject.  Such  commissioner  when  appointed  shall  take 
an  oath  to  well  and  faithfully  perform  the  duties  imposed 
upon  him,  and  shall  thereafter  have  the  same  power  to 
administer  oaths,  compel  the  production  of  evidence,  and 
the  attendance  of  witnesses  as  the  said  court  would  have  if 
sitting  in  the  same  matter.  Said  commissioner  shall  re- 
ceive such  compensation  as  may  be  provided  by  law  or  by 
the  order  of  said  court,  to  be  approved  by  the  governor. 

Sec.  23.  Any  order  made  by  said  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations  as  to  a  minimum  wage  or  a  standard  of  wages 
shall  be  deemed  prima  facie  reasonable  and  just,  and  if 
said  minimum  wage  or  standard  of  wages  shall  be  in 
excess  of  the  wages  theretofore  paid  in  the  industry,  em- 
ployment, utility  or  common  carrier,  then  and  in  that  event 
the  workers  affected  thereby  shall  be  entitled  to  receive 
said  minimum  wage  or  standard  of  wages  from  the  date  of 


APPENDIX  155 

the  service  of  summons  or  publication  of  notice  instituting 
said  investigation,  and  shall  have  the  right  individually, 
or  in  case  of  incorporated  unions  or  associations,  or  unin- 
corporated unions  or  associations  entitled  thereto,  col- 
lectively, to  recover  in  any  court  of  competent  jurisdic- 
tion the  difference  between  the  w^ages  actually  paid  and 
said  minimum  wage  or  standard  of  wages  so  found  and 
determined  by  said  court  in  such  order.  It  shall  be  the 
duty  of  all  employers  affected  by  the  provisions  of  this  act, 
during  the  pendency  of  any  investigation  brought  under 
this  act,  or  any.  litigation  resulting  therefrom,  to  keep  an 
accurate  account  of  all  wages  paid  to  all  workers  inter- 
ested in  said  investigation  or  proceeding:  Prox'idcd,  That 
in  case  said  order  shall  fix  a  wage  or  standard  of  wages 
which  is  lower  than  the  wages  theretofore  paid  in  the  in- 
dustry, employment,  utility  or  common  carrier  affected, 
then  and  in  that  event  the  employers  shall  have  the  same 
right  to  recover  in  the  same  manner  as  provided  in  this 
section  with  reference  to  the  workers. 

Sec.  24.  With  the  consent  of  the  governor,  the  judges 
of  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  are  hereby  author- 
ized and  empowered  to  make,  or  cause  to  be  made,  within 
this  state  or  elsewhere,  such  investigations  and  inquiries 
as  to  industrial  conditions  and  relations  as  may  be  profit- 
able or  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  familiarizing  them- 
selves with  industrial  problems  such  as  may  arise  inidcr 
the  provisions  of  this  act.  All  the  expenses  incurred  in 
the  performance  of  their  official  duties  by  the  individual 
members  of  said  court  and  by  the  employees  and  officers 
of  said  court,  shall  be  paid  by  the  state  out  of  funds  ap- 
propriated therefor  by  the  legislature,  but  all  warrants  cov- 
ering such  expenses  shall  be  approved  by  the  governor  of 
said  state. 

Sec.  25.  The  rights  and  remedies  given  and  provided 
by  this  act  shall  be  construed  to  be  cumulative  of  all  other 


156  APPENDIX 

laws  in  force  in  said  state  relating  to  the  same  matters, 
and  this  act  shall  not  be  interpreted  as  a  repeal  of  any 
other  act  now  existing  in  said  state  with  reference  to  the 
same  matters  referred  to  in  this  act,  except  where  the  same 
may  be  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

Sec.  26.  The  provisions  of  this  act  and  all  grants  of 
power,  authority  and  jurisdiction  herein  made  to  said 
Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall  be  liberally  construed 
and  all  incidental  powers  necessary  to  carry  into  effect 
the  provisions  of  this  act  are  hereby  expressly  granted  to 
and  conferred  upon  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations. 

Sec.  2^.  Annually  and  on  or  before  January  first  of 
each  year,  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall  formu- 
late and  make  a  report  of  all  its  acts  and  proceedings,  in- 
cluding a  financial  statement  of  expenses,  and  shall  submit 
the  same  to  the  governor  of  this  state  for  his  information. 
All  expenses  incident  to  the  conduct  of  the  business  of 
said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall  be  paid  by  the 
said  court  on  warrants  signed  by  its  presiding  judge  and 
clerk,  and  countersigned  by  the  governor  and  shall  be 
paid  out  of  funds  appropriated  therefor  by  the  legislature. 
The  said  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  shall,  on  or  before 
the  convening  of  the  legislature,  make  a  detailed  estimate 
of  the  probable  expenses  of  conducting  its  business  and 
proceedings  for  the  ensuing  two  years,  and  attach  thereto 
a  copy  of  the  reports  furnished  the  governor,  all  of  which 
shall  be  submitted  to  the  governor  of  this  state  and  by  him 
submitted  to  the  legislature. 

Sec.  28.  If  any  section  or  provision  of  this  act  shall  be 
found  invalid  by  any  court,  it  shall  be  conclusively  pre- 
sumed that  this  act  would  have  been  passed  by  the  legisla- 
ture without  such  invalid  section  or  provision,  and  the  act 
as  a  whole  shall  not  be  declared  invalid  by  reason  of  the 
fact  that  one  or  more  sections  or  provisions  may  be  found 
to  be  invalid  by  any  court. 


APPENDIX  157 

Sec.  29.  All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  in  conflict  herewith 
are  hereby  repealed. 

Sec.  30.  This  act  shall  take  effect  and  be  in  force  from 
and  after  its  publication  in  the  official  state  paper. 


IN  THE 

COURT  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS 

STATE  OF  KANSAS 

The  State  of  Kansas,  on  the  Relation  of  Richard  J. 
Hopkins,  Attorney-general,  W.  J.  Price,  P.  C.  Kil- 
ler, P.  Sullivan,  and  Charles  White,  Complainants, 
vs. 

The  Topeka  Edison  Company,  a  Corporation, 
Respondent. 

Docket  No.  3254-I-2 

opinion 

By  Huggins,  Presiding  Judge 

The  complainant  Richard  J.  Hopkins  is  the  attorney- 
general  of  the  state  of  Kansas ;  the  other  complainants  are 
residents  of  Topeka,  Kan.,  are  electrical  workers,  mem- 
bers of  Local  Union  No.  841  of  the  International  Brother- 
hood of  Electrical  Workers,  and  also  members  of  a  com- 
mittee appointed  by  said  local  union  to  take  action  in  the 
matter  of  the  dispute  and  controversy  hereinafter  stated. 
The  respondent,  the  Topeka  Edison  Company,  is  a  cor- 
poration under  the  laws  of  the  state  of  Kansas,  and  is 
engaged  in  the  business  of  generating  and  selling  electric 
current  for  lighting  and  power  purposes.    It  supplies  the 

158 


APPENDIX  159 

citizens  of  the  city  of  Topeka,  and  also  of  the  city  of  Oak- 
land, in  Shawnee  county,  Kansas,  with  current  for  light- 
ing their  houses  and  places  of  business.  It  supplies  the 
current  used  as  power  by  mills  and  numerous  other  in- 
dustries, and  also  by  the  Topeka  Street  Railway  Company, 
which  operates  the  street-car  system  in  said  cities  of  To- 
peka and  Oakland. 

The  complaint  alleges  the  matters  heretofore  stated, 
and  further  that  a  controversy  has  arisen  between  the 
members  of  said  local  union  and  said  respondent  in  the 
matter  of  hours  of  labor  and  wages.  The  complaint  fur- 
ther alleges  that  said  local  union  No.  841  has  a  member- 
ship of  approximately  forty  members ;  that  the  individual 
complainants,  as  such  committee  have  diligently  endeav- 
ored to  bring  about  a  settlement  and  agreement  with  the 
respondent  as  to  just  and  reasonable  wages,  but  have 
failed  to  do  so.  The  complaint  further  alleges  that  the 
individual  complainants  are  duly  authorized  to  represent 
said  local  union  No.  841  and  have  requested  the  attorney- 
general  of  the  state  of  Kansas  to  assist  them  in  present- 
ing their  grievance  to  this  court;  and  if  said  controversy 
remains  unsettled,  it  will  lead  to  other  and  further  dis- 
putes and  controversies  between  said  workers  and  said 
respondents,  and  between  employees  and  employers  en- 
gaged in  similar  industries ;  and  that  it  will  endanger  the 
continuity  and  efficiency  of  service  of  said  utility  and 
thereby  endanger  the  orderly  operation  not  only  of  said 
utility  but  of  other  industries  relying  upon  said  utility  for 
current,  for  light,  and  for  power,  and  that  it  will  thereby 
endanger  the  public  peace,  health  and  general  welfare. 

The  complainants  pray  that  this  court  make  due  investi- 
gation and  ascertain  the  facts,  and  after  due  hearing  make 
such  findings  and  prescribe  such  orders,  rules  and  regula- 
tions, wages,  and  hours  of  labor  as  may  be  just  and  rea- 
sonable. 


l6o  APPENDIX 

To  this  complaint  the  respondent  answers,  admitting  its 
incorporation  and  the  extent  and  nature  of  its  business  as 
alleged  in  the  complaint,  and  admitting  the  controversy, 
and  that  said  controversy  is  unsettled ;  and  stating  that 
the  respondent  has  ofifered  the  complainants  an  increase 
in  wages  of  two  and  one-half  cents  per  hour,  which  com- 
plainants have  refused,  and  are  insisting  upon  an  increase 
of  ten  cents  per  hour  and  the  basic  eight-hour  day,  etc. 
The  answer  denies  all  the  other  allegations  stated  in  the 
complaint,  but  instead  of  the  prayer  usual  in  such  cases 
the  respondent  in  said  answer  states  that  it  "respectfully 
submits  and  tenders  the  issue  here  presented,  and  wel- 
comes the  good  offices  of  this  court  in  a  judicial  determina- 
tion of  that  which  is  equitable  and  just  in  the  premises." 

It  would,  therefore,  seem  that  while  originally  this  mat- 
ter was  filed  as  an  action  upon  a  controversy  under  the 
compulsory  features  of  the  industrial  laws  of  the  state 
of  Kansas,  it  is  now  before  the  court  more  in  the  nature 
of  a  voluntary  submission  by  mutual  agreement  of  a  dis- 
pute between  the  above  parties  under  section  21  of  the 
industrial  act. 

Under  the  provisions  of  the  industrial  laws  of  this 
state,  this  is  a  case  of  which  this  court  has  jurisdiction. 
The  respondent  is  a  public  utility  engaged  in  the  extremely 
important  business  of  furnishing  electric  current  to  the 
citizens  of  a  community  of  some  fifty  thousand  popula- 
tion. The  controversy  is  of  such  a  nature  as  that  it  may 
endanger  the  public  peace,  health,  and  general  welfare, 
and  the  continuity  and  efficiency  of  the  service.  Section  6 
of  the  industrial  act  provides : 

"It  is  hereby  declared  and  determined  to  be  necessary  for 
the  public  peace,  health  and  general  welfare  of  the  people  of 
this  state  that  the  industries,  employments,  public  utilities, 
and  common  carriers  herein  specified  shall  be  operated  with 
reasonable  continuity  and  efficiency  in  order  that  the  people 


APPENDIX  l6l 

of  this  state  may  live  in  peace  and  security  and  be  supplied 
with  the  necessaries  of  life." 

In  section  9  of  the  act  is  provided: 

"It  is  hereby  declared  necessary  for  the  promotion  of  the 
general  welfare  that  workers  engaged  in  any  of  said  indus- 
tries, employments,  utilities  or  common  carriers  shall  receive 
at  all  times  a  fair  wage  and  have  healthful  and  moral  sur- 
roundings while  engaged  in  such  labor,  and  that  capital 
invested  therein  shall  receive  a  fair  rate  of  return  to  the 
owners  thereof." 

Wholly  aside  from  altruistic  considerations,  always  vital 
in  such  cases,  the  intention  of  the  legislature  is  plain  and 
its  wisdom  cannot  be  doubted.  These  are  the  essential 
industries  upon  the  continuous  and  efficient  operation  of 
which  the  people  depend  for  the  necessaries  and  comforts 
of  life.  It  is,  therefore,  a  matter  of  public  interest  that 
skilled  and  faithful  workers  should  be  always  available  in 
these  industries.  The  legislature  evidently  considered  that 
in  order  to  insure  skilled  and  faithful  workers  a  fair  wage 
must  be  paid  and  healthful  and  moral  suroundings  pro- 
vided, else  workers  of  the  highest  skill  and  fidelity  would 
leave  the  employment  of  such  institutions  and  seek  a  better 
wage  and  better  conditions  offered  by  enterprises  of  a 
private  nature.  The  same  reasoning  applies  with  equal 
force  to  capital  seeking  investment. 

The  evidence  in  this  case  is  very  vokiminous  and  covers 
a  wide  range  of  facts  and  conditions.  There  is  very  little 
conflict  in  it.  The  evidence  shows  conclusively  that  the 
workers  who  are  represented  by  the  individual  complain- 
ants are  skilled  workers ;  that  they  have  been  employed, 
in  most  cases,  by  the  respondent  for  a  considerable  length 
of  time ;  that  they  have  had  sufficient  experience  and  have 
acquired  sufficient  skill  to  be  called  "first-class"  workers. 
Their  fidelity  is  not  questioned,  and  there  seems  to  be  no 


l62  APPENDIX 

feeling  of  animosity  between  the  management  of  the 
respondent  and  the  workers  themselves.  They  are  known 
as  "linemen."  They  build  and  repair  the  transmission 
lines  by  means  of  which  the  respondent  carries  and  dis- 
tributes the  current  from  its  plant  to  its  various  custom- 
ers. The  work  in  which  they  are  engaged  is  hazardous, 
owing  to  the  fact  that  they  are  compelled,  at  times,  to 
handle  wires  carrying  2,300  volts  of  electric  current.  One 
death  has  occurred  in  recent  years  and  several  serious  acci- 
dents liave  taken  place  caused  by  workers  coming  in  con- 
tact with  "hot"  wires.  The  evidence  shows  that  many  life 
insurance  companies  refuse  to  insure  workers  engaged  in 
this  line  of  work,  and  that  many  others,  although  accept- 
ing the  risk,  require  a  larger  premium.  The  evidence  also 
shows  that  it  takes  from  three  to  four  years'  study  and 
experience  to  fit  persons  to  become  first-class  linemen. 

For  several  years  prior  to  1916  workers  of  this  class 
employed  by  the  respondent  were  paid  a  daily  wage  of 
$2.75.  In  1916  the  wage  was  increased  to  $go  per  month 
on  the  basis  of  a  26-day  month  and  a  nine-hour  day.  In 
May,  1919,  another  increase  was  granted  whereby  these 
workers  received  sixty  cents  per  hour  for  a  basic  day  of 
eight  hours,  with  time  and  a  half  for  overtime  and  double 
time  for  Sunday  work. 

A  controversy  has  recently  existed  between  the  respon- 
dent and  the  employees  in  regard  to  the  eight-hour  day. 
It  seems  that  the  employees  are  required  usually  to  report 
for  work  at  the  storehouse  of  the  respondent,  where  they 
gather  up  their  tools  and  such  material  as  they  may  need 
to  use  for  the  day's  work,  place  it  upon  a  truck  and  pro- 
ceed to  the  location  upon  the  lines  of  the  respondent  at 
which  they  are  to  begin  work  for  the  day.  Heretofore, 
time  has  begun  when  the  men  arrived  at  the  point  on  the 
respondent's  lines  at  which  they  were  to  begin  work,  and 


APPENDIX  163 

they  have  not  been  paid  for  the  time  which  they  spent  in 
the  storehouse  collecting  their  material  and  tools,  or  for 
the  time  spent  on  the  way  from  the  storehouse  to  the  job. 
During  the  progress  of  the  trial,  however,  the  workers 
agreed  to  share  equally  with  the  company  the  time  spent 
within,  or  in  going  to  and  from,  the  storehouse — the  men 
to  have  credit  for  "two  ways"  and  the  company  to  have 
credit  for  "two  ways."  This  proposition,  in  open  court, 
was  accepted  by  the  respondent's  manager  and  is  there- 
fore no  longer  a  matter  of  controversy.  The  fairness  of 
the  proposition  appeals  to  the  court. 

Prior  to  the  year  191 9,  the  workers  were  able  to  live  and 
support  their  families  reasonably  upon  the  wage  which 
they  received.  One  of  the  workers  testified  that  on  his 
former  wages  he  saved  some  money  with  which  he  bought 
Liberty  bonds.  This  same  worker,  however,  testified  that 
under  the  new  schedule  of  sixty  cents  per  hour,  or  $4.80 
per  day,  with  the  tremendous  increase  in  the  cost  of  living, 
he  is  unable  to  save  anything  and  is  unable  to  support  his 
family  as  well  as  he  did  under  the  $2.75  per  day  or  the  $90 
per  month  scale.  The  evidence  clearly  shows  what  is  a 
matter  of  common  knowledge — that  the  cost  of  living  has 
increased  to  an  enormous  extent  and  that  a  considerable 
increase  has  occurred  within  the  past  year.  Speaking 
approximately,  the  price  of  food  had  increased  by  Novem- 
ber, 1919,  over  November,  191 3,  100  per  cent;  clothing, 
155  per  cent;  and  furniture  and  furnishings,  156  per  cent. 

One  of  the  workers  also  testified  that  he  had  bought 
none  but  working  clothes  for  the  past  four  years ;  that  a 
pair  of  working  shoes  he  formerly  paid  $2.50  for,  last 
year  he  paid  $6  for ;  and  that  this  year  they  cost  $9.  He 
testified  that  he  gave  $3  for  a  pair  of  half-soles  on  his 
working  shoes;  that  a  pair  of  overalls,  which  formerly 
cost  90  cents  or  a  dollar,  now  cost  $2.85.    The  evidence 


1 64  APPENDIX 

shows  that  the  cost  of  the  coal  used  by  these  employees  in 
1916  and  1917  was  $4.50  a  ton,  while  during  the  past 
winter  the  price  of  the  same  coal  was  $10.50  a  ton.  The 
evidence  also  shows  that  decently  habitable  houses  in  the 
city  of  Topeka  rent  for  from  thirty  per  cent  to  fifty  per 
cent  more  than  they  did  a  few  years  ago.  It  is  only  fair, 
however,  to  state  that  the  evidence  shows  a  slight  decrease 
in  the  price  of  some  food  products  within  the  last  month 
or  six  weeks,  and  it  is  hoped  that  there  will  be  a  further 
decline  in  these  unprecedented  and  exorbitant  prices. 

While  the  scale  of  wages  for  this  kind  of  mechanical 
work  at  Topeka  is  only  $4.80,  at  Wichita  and  Kansas  City, 
Kan.,  it  is  $6  per  day.  The  same  class  of  work  in  the 
building  trades  in  Topeka  is  $7  per  day  and  at  other  places, 
somewhat  higher  than  that.  The  evidence  shows,  how- 
ever, that  while  the  employment  of  these  outside  linemen 
is  practically  continuous,  the  inside  or  building  trades  men 
are  engaged  in  work  which  is  more  or  less  seasonable  in  its 
character  and  not  continuous.  The  outside  linemen — first- 
class  men,  such  as  the  complainants — at  Abilene  get  60 
cents  per  hour;  at  Leavenworth,  $90  per  month;  at  Law- 
rence, 42  cents  per  hour;  at  Manhattan,  $110  per  month; 
at  Junction  City,  42  cents  per  hour ;  at  Pittsburg,  60  cents 
per  hour;  at  Atchison,  60  cents  per  hour.  These  are 
smaller  towns  where  fewer  men  are  employed  and  are 
probably  not  as  comparable  with  Topeka  as  are  Wichita 
and  Kansas  City,  both  of  which  are  approximately  the 
same  sized  towns  as  Topeka. 

The  foregoing  seems  to  the  court  to  state  the  essential 
facts  of  the  case.  The  only  controversy  left  to  be  settled 
is  the  controversy  as  to  the  wages  to  be  paid.  The  court 
is  commanded  by  the  people  of  this  state,  speaking 
through  the  state  legislature,  to  assure  to  these  workers  a 
fair  wage,  and  to  this  utility  a  fair  rate  of  return  upon  its 
property  used  and  useful  in  the  service  of  the  public.    The 


APPENDIX  165 

question,  therefore,  which  we  must  now  decide  is:  What 
is  a  fair  wage?  The  Congress  of  the  United  States  in  the 
recent  railroad  legislation  declared  that : 

"In  determining  the  justness  and  reasonableness  of  such 
wages  and  salaries  or  working  conditions  the  Board  shall,  so 
far  as  applicable,  take  into  consideration  among  other  rele- 
vant circumstances : 

"(i)  The  scales  of  wages  paid  for  similar  kinds  of  work 
in  other  industries ; 

"(2)   The  relation  between  wages  and  the  cost  of  living; 

"(3)   The  hazards  of  the  employment; 

"(4)   The  training  and  skill  required; 

"(5)   The  degree  of  responsibility; 

"(6)   The  character  and  regularity  of  the  employment;  and 

"(7)  Inequalities  of  increases  in  wages  or  of  treatment, 
the  result  of  previous  wage  orders  or  adjustments." 

To  the  points  enumerated  hy  Congress,  this  court,  in 
view  of  the  almost  universal  complaint  as  to  inefficiency 
and  lower  production  in  all  lines  of  industry,  desires  to 
add  another,  to  wit : 

(8)  The  skill,  industry,  and  fidelity  of  the  individual 
employee. 

A  living  wage  may  be  defined  as  a  wage  which  enables 
the  worker  to  supply  himself  and  those  absolutely  depen- 
dent upon  him  with  sufficient  food  to  maintain  life  and 
health;  with  a  shelter  from  the  inclemencies  of  the 
weather ;  with  sufficient  clothing  to  preserve  the  body  from 
the  cold  and  to  enable  persons  to  mingle  among  their  fel- 
lows in  such  ways  as  may  be  necessary  in  the  preservation 
of  life.  But  it  is  not  a  living  wage  only  which  this  court 
is  commanded  by  the  people  of  this  state  to  assure  work- 
ers engaged  in  these  essential  industries.  The  statute  uses 
the  word  "fair"  and  commands  us  to  assure  to  these  work- 
ers a  "fair"  wage.  What  is  a  fair  wage?  Upon  this 
subject,  of  course,  there  may  be  a  great  variety  of  opinions 
expressed.     It  seems  safe  to  say,  however,  that  the  cir- 


l66  APPENDIX 

cumstances  above  enumerated  should  be  considered  in  ar- 
riving at  a  conclusion  as  to  what  constitutes  a  fair  wage. 
The  skilled  worker,  in  fairness,  should  have  a  higher  wage 
than  the  unskilled  worker.  The  worker  who  has  spent 
years  of  time  and  efifort  in  preparing  himself  for  a  pecu- 
liarly technical  line  of  work  is  entitled  to  greater  consid- 
eration from  the  public  than  the  more  unskilled  worker. 
The  hazards  of  the  employment  should  also  be  noted  and 
the  worker  engaged  in  such  an  employment  as  that  under 
consideration  should  receive  a  higher  wage  than  his  fellow 
who  may  be  engaged  in  a  safe  occupation.  The  degree  of 
responsibility  placed  upon  the  worker  is  a  matter  of  im- 
portance. The  continuity  and  regularity  of  the  employ- 
ment should  be  considered,  for  it  is  apparent  that  an  em- 
ployment which  is  seasonable  in  its  nature  must  have  a 
higher  wage  than  one  in  which  regular,  steady  work  is 
offered,  because,  after  all,  it  is  the  annual  earnings  that  are 
to  govern  rather  than  the  daily  wage,  in  many  instances. 
By  no  means  the  least  important  consideration  should  be 
the  industry  and  fidelity  of  the  individual,  for  the  worker 
who  is  faithful  to  his  trust  and  is  industrious,  working  to 
the  best  of  his  ability  in  the  interest  of  his  employer,  is 
entitled,  as  a  matter  of  right,  to  a  greater  reward  than  the 
worker  who  thinks  only  of  his  wage  and  not  of  the  interest 
of  his  employer  and  of  the  public  who  are  directly  af- 
fected by  his  labors.  Perhaps  more  important  than  any 
other  circumstance,  however,  is  the  relation  of  the  wage  to 
the  cost  of  living. 

In  all  these  respects  the  complainants  herein  represent  a 
class  of  workers  who  measure  up  to  the  best  standard  and 
are  called  "first-class  workers"  as  well  as  "skilled  work- 
ers." Such  persons,  in  all  fairness,  are  entitled  to  a  wage 
which  will  enable  them  to  procure  for  themselves  and 
their  families  all  the  necessaries  and  a  reasonable  share 
of  the  comforts  of  life.    They  are  entitled  to  a  wage  which 


APPENDIX  167 

will  enable  them  by  industry  and  economy  not  only  to 
supply  themselves  with  opportunities  for  intellectual  ad- 
vancement and  reasonable  recreation,  but  also  to  enable  the 
parents  working  together  to  furnish  to  the  children  ample 
opportunities  for  intellectual  and  moral  advancement,  for 
education,  and  for  an  equal  opportunity  in  the  race  of  life. 
A  fair  wage  will  also  allow  the  frugal  man  to  provide 
reasonably  for  sickness  and  old  age. 

The  industrial  statutes,  however,  empower  this  court  to 
fix  only  a  minimum  wage,  and  in  fixing  said  wage  to  state 
a  reasonable  time  which  said  wage  shall  continue  or  until 
changed  by  agreement  by  the  parties  with  the  approval  of 
the  court.  It  is  not,  therefore,  for  the  court  to  fix  a  maxi- 
mum wage.  The  minimum  may  be  fixed  and  the  maxi- 
mum must  depend  upon  the  skill,  fidelity  and  industry  of 
the  employee,  the  fair  and  equitable  disposition  of  the 
employer,  the  prosperity  of  the  business,  and  other  econo- 
mic circumstances. 

In  view  of  all  the  matters  heretofore  stated,  the  court 
finds  that  the  agreement  made  in  open  court  with  regard 
to  a  division  between  the  complainants  and  the  respondent 
of  the  time  taken  at  the  storehouse,  and  between  there  and 
the  job,  is  a  fair  and  reasonable  practice  and  regulation 
and  should  be  enforced  as  stated  herein.  The  court  fur- 
ther finds  that  the  wage  paid  by  the  respondent  to  the  com- 
plainants is  unreasonably  low  and  is  not  a  fair  wage  to  be 
paid  to  these  complainants  and  other  workers  similarly 
situated  and  employed  by  the  respondent  because  of  the 
present  unprecedented  cost  of  living  and  other  facts  and 
conditions  herein  stated :  and  that  a  fair  minimum  wage  to 
be  paid  the  complainants  and  others  similarly  situated  and 
employed  by  the  respondent  at  this  time  is  sixty-seven  and 
one-half  cents  (675^  cents)  per  hour  on  the  basis  of  an 
eight-hour  day,  time  and  a  half  for  overtime  and  double 
time  for  Sundays.    The  court  further  finds  that  said  rules 


l68  APPENDIX 

and  practices  and  such  minimum  wage  should  be  insti- 
tuted on  the  first  of  the  ensuing  calendar  month  and 
should  continue  for  a  period  of  six  months  thereafter  un- 
less changed  by  agreement  of  the  parties  with  the  ap- 
proval by  the  court. 

An  order  will  issue  accordingly. 

Judges  Reed  and  Wark  concur. 


IN  THE 
COURT  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS 

STATE  OF  KANSAS 

The  Amalgamated  Association  of  Street  and  Elec- 
tric Railway  Employees  of  America,  Local  Union 
No.  497,  Complainants, 
vs. 
The  Joplin  &  Pittsburg  Railway  Company, 

Respondent. 

Docket  No.  3,653 

opinion 

December  9,  1920. 
By  Huggins,  Presiding  Judge 

This  is  a  complaint  on  the  part  of  certain  organized 
workers,  employees  of  the  Joplin  &  Pittsburg  Railway 
Company,  in  which,  in  substance,  they  state  that  they  have 
heretofore  worked  for  the  company  under  a  contract 
which  expired  August  i,  1920;  that  the  company  and  the 
officers  of  the  local  union  have  attempted  to  negotiate  a 
new  contract ;  that  they  have  agreed  upon  a  large  part  of 
the  contract,  but  that  there  are  elements  upon  which  they 
are  unable  to  come  to  an  agreement.  They  state  facts 
and  have  proved  facts  in  this  case  sufficient  to  give  this 
court  jurisdiction  of  the  matter.  The  prayer  of  the  com- 
plaint is,  in  substance,  that  this  court  take  jurisdiction  of 

i6q 


170  APPENDIX 

the  controversy ;  that  the  matter  be  heard  and  investigated 
according  to  law,  and  that  the  court  make  such  findings  of 
fact  as  may  be  necessary  to  preserve  the  pubHc  peace  and 
welfare  and  protect  the  status  of  the  parties  and  the  public 
interests  involved  herein ;  to  find  what  is  a  fair,  reasonable 
and  just  wage;  and  to  make  such  findings  with  regard  to 
the  terms  of  the  proposed  contract  as  may  be  just  and  rea- 
sonable in  the  premises. 

The  complainants  herein  have  all  been  granted  an  in- 
crease in  wages  by  this  court  since  the  latter  part  of  April, 
1920.  In  the  present  complaint  they  are  demanding  an 
additional  increase  in  wages.  Some  additional  testimony 
as  to  living  costs  was  introduced  in  the  present  case,  and 
it  was  agreed  in  open  court  that  the  court  might  take  into 
consideration  all  the  evidence  introduced  at  the  former 
hearings  in  cases  between  the  same  parties  as  to  the  cost 
of  living  in  Pittsburg,  Kan.,  and  vicinity.  The  evidence 
does  not  show  an  increase  in  the  cost  of  living  since  the 
former  adjudication  referred  to.  There  has  been  an  in- 
crease in  some  commodities,  but  the  evidence  fairly  shows 
that  such  increases  are  ofifset  by  other  decreases  in  the 
cost  of  the  necessaries  of  life,  and  that  there  is  a  general 
tendency  toward  a  decrease  in  living  costs.  This  decrease 
has  not  yet  materially  afifected  the  ultimate  consumer,  but 
there  is  at  least  no  evidence  of  an  increase  in  living  costs. 
The  court  upon  all  the  evidence,  is  satisfied  with  the  mini- 
mum wage  scale  heretofore  provided  by  the  court's  orders 
in  cases  between  the  same  parties.  The  court  holds  that 
the  complainants  are  now  receiving,  under  orders  of  this 
court,  a  fair  wage  in  the  sense  of  the  Kansas  industrial 
law,  and  that  further  increases  at  this  time  would  not  be 
justifiable. 

The  complainants  desire  a  clause  in  the  new  contract 
requiring  the  company  to  employ  three  men  on  freight 
trains  that  handle  three  or  more  cars  at  the  same  time. 


APPENDIX  171 

Considerable  evidence  was  taken  upon  this  point,  but.  on 
the  whole,  the  court  feels  that  the  employment  of  the  third 
man  upon  the  short  freight  trains  usually  hauled  by  this 
electric  interurban  company  would  be  of  no  public  benefit 
and  would  add  an  unjust  burden  upon  the  respondent, 
which  would  ultimately  be  reflected  in  lower  wages  to  the 
the  men,  or  poorer  service  to  the  public. 

The  complainants  further  desire  a  clause  requiring,  on 
extra  runs,  to  pay  at  least  wages  for  four  hours  per  day 
for  each  day  the  extra  man  is  called  and  works.  In  the 
opinion  of  the  court,  this  clause  should  be  inserted  in  the 
new  contract,  so  worded  as  to  provide  that  extra  men 
should  receive  a  daily  wage  that  shall  pay  a  minimum  wage 
scale  of  four  hours  for  each  day  they  are  called  and 
actually  work. 

The  complainants  also  desire  a  clause  in  the  contract  to 
the  effect  that  all  regular  runs  shall  pay  at  least  eight  hours 
a  day,  to  be  completed  in  nine  consecutive  hours,  and  time 
and  a  half  to  be  paid  for  all  over  eight  hours.  In  the 
opinion  of  the  court,  this  clause  should  be  inserted  in  a 
modified  form,  so  that  all  regular  men,  when  working  at 
all  as  regular  men,  shall  receive  a  wage  of  at  least  eight 
hours  for  each  day  they  work.  The  evidence  shows  that 
the  public  necessities  in  the  community  served  by  this 
electric  interurban  railway  company  are  such  that  eighteen 
hours'  service  should  be  given  in  each  day.  The  evidence 
also  shows  that  the  men  are  now  working  upon  that  basis 
in  two  shifts  of  nine  hours  each,  but  that  sometimes, 
owing  to  various  unavoidable  conditions,  a  man  on  a  cer- 
tain car  may  be  delayed  in  getting  into  the  barn,  so  that 
the  day  extends  a  little  more  than  nine  hours.  The  court 
is  of  the  opinion  that  the  working  day  should  not  exceed 
nine  hours,  except  in  cases  of  some  unavoidable  delay,  as 
above  indicated.  It  might  be  necessary  to  take  a  few  min- 
utes longer  in  which  to  get  to  the  car  barn.    Therefore,  this 


172  APPENDIX 

clause  should  be  modified  so  as  to  give  the  eight  hours'  pay 
as  stated,  to  be  completed  in  not  to  exceed  nine  hours  and 
thirty  minutes,  with  time  and  a  half  for  all  time  over  nine 
hours. 

The  complainants  further  desire  a  clause  in  the  contract 
requiring  time  and  a  half  to  be  paid  all  barn  and  shop  men 
for  working  on  Sundays.  Upon  this  point  the  court  is  of 
the  opinion  that  no  work  should  be  done  in  the  shops  and 
barns  on  Sundays  except  such  as  is  absolutely  necessary. 
No  mechanical  work  should  be  required  unless  it  would  be 
impossible  to  operate  to  full  capacity  on  Monday  morning 
without  such  mechanical  work  being  done  on  Sunday. 
The  work  in  the  barn  should  be  limited,  so  far  as  possible, 
to  the  cleaning  of  cars  for  the  Monday  morning  run,  or 
for  the  Sunday  run.  This  business,  under  the  necessities 
of  the  case,  must  operate  seven  days  in  the  week.  How- 
ever, it  is  not,  in  the  opinion  of  the  court,  proper  to  pen- 
alize the  company  for  Sunday  work  which  is  absolutely 
necessary.  The  court  recommends  that  the  parties  place 
in  the  contract  a  clause  limiting  Svuiday  work  as  above 
stated,  but  leaving  the  pay  for  Sunday  work  straight  pay 
instead  of  time  and  a  half. 

The  testimony  in  this  case  showed  that  up  to  about 
August,  1920,  the  men  in  the  car  barns  were  employed  on 
a  ten-hour  basis  at  42  cents  per  hour.  Subsequently  the 
working  schedule  was  reduced  to  an  eight-hour  basis.  It 
was  testified  both  by  the  company  officials  and  the  em- 
ployees that  the  amount  of  work  turned  out  by  the  same  or 
a  smaller  number  of  men  working  eight  hours  was  equal 
to  that  formerly  handled  on  a  ten-hour  basis.  The  efifect 
of  the  change  in  the  working  schedule  was  to  reduce  the 
compensation  of  car-barn  employees  to  the  extent  of  two 
hours  per  day,  or  one-fifth  of  their  total  wage.  In  view  of 
the  fact  that  it  is  agreed  that  the  amount  of  work  per- 
formed by  these  men  on  an  eight-hour  basis  is  as  much  as 


APPENDIX  173 

was  performed  formerly  on  a  ten-hour  basis,  the  court 
feels  that  the  equities  of  the  situation  would  be  preserved 
if  the  company  would  adjust  the  compensation  until  April 
I,  1921,  on  a  basis  of  the  equal  of  nine  hours'  pay  for 
eight  hours'  service.  Such  an  act  would  be  a  recognition  of 
the  higher  efficiency  at  which  the  men  are  now  working 
and  would  afford  some  relief  to  the  employees  during  the 
period  of  readjustment  downward  of  living  costs. 

One  of  the  principal  contentions  of  the  complainants  is 
that  the  eight-hour  day  should  be  established  in  this  busi- 
ness. Upon  this  point  considerable  testimony  was  taken, 
and  the  hearing  was  continued  for  the  purpose  of  permit- 
ting the  chief  accountant  of  this  court  to  go  to  Pittsburg 
and  go  over  the  books  and  records  of  the  compan}-,  to  meet 
the  men  and  see  if  it  would  be  possible  to  figure  out  a 
schedule  of  trains  whereby  the  eighteen-hour  service  re- 
quired by  the  community  might  be  divided  into  three 
shifts,  so  that  the  men  could  do  the  work  in  eight-hour 
shifts  instead  of  nine.  After  considerable  study,  and  after 
consulting  with  the  management  and  with  the  men  at 
Pittsburg,  our  chief  accountant  worked  out  a  schedule  for 
the  operation  of  these  trains  upon  the  eight-hour  basis,  but 
with  considerable  additional  cost  to  the  company.  Upon 
the  further  hearing  of  the  case,  however,  when  the  ques- 
tion was  presented,  the  representatives  of  the  men  took  the 
position  that  they  must  have  the  same  pay  for  the  eight- 
hour  day  which  they  are  receiving  for  the  nine-hour  day, 
and  according  to  the  figures  of  our  chief  accountant,  which 
were  uncontroverted  at  the  trial,  this  would  put  an  addi- 
tional financial  burden  upon  the  company  in  excess  of 
$25,000  annually.  Now,  while  that  is  not  a  very  large 
sum  and  would  not  be  a  burden  to  a  big  railroad  company, 
yet  as  stated  in  previous  opinions  of  this  court,  this  com- 
pany is  operating  now  on  a  very  close  business  margin. 
In  fact,  the  evidence  before  us  shows  that  in  order  to  pay 


1 74  APPENDIX 

fixed  charges,  including  interest  upon  a  reasonable  bonded 
indebtedness  not  in  excess  of  the  actual  value  of  the  prop- 
erty, the  company  would  have  to  take  from  its  deprecia- 
tion fund  if  it  is  to  pay  reasonable  rates  of  interest,  which 
the  evidence  shows  it  is  required  to  pay.  It  is  plain,  there- 
fore, to  put  an  additional  burden  of  $25,000  a  year  upon 
this  company  is  a  matter  of  serious  concern  to  the  com- 
pany itself  and  to  the  community  which  it  serves.  This 
court  would  not  hesitate  to  place  that  burden  upon  the 
company  if  it  were  necessary  to  do  so  in  order  to  provide 
a  fair  wage  and  reasonable  working  conditions.  As  stated 
in  Docket  No.  3,283,  wages  must  come  before  dividends, 
and  a  business  which  cannot  pay  a  fair  wage  and  at  the 
same  time  earn  a  reasonable  return  must  eventually  liqui- 
date. 

This  brings  us  to  the  question  :  Is  a  nine-hour  day  in  the 
street  or  interurban  railway  business  an  unfair  day  to 
labor?  In  the  opinion  of  the  court,  no  arbitrary  rule  can 
be  fixed  as  to  the  length  of  a  working  day.  In  many  voca- 
tions, such  as  deep-shaft  mining,  working  in  smelters, 
glass  factories,  steel  mills,  around  furnaces,  or  where  there 
are  conditions  detrimental  to  the  health,  or  where  the  work 
is  so  arduous  as  to  be  a  severe  tax  upon  the  strength,  a 
six-hour  day  may  be  too  long.  In  many  lines  of  labor  a 
longer  day  would  be  unreasonable  and  unfair.  It  depends 
upon  the  nature  of  the  work.  It  depends  upon  the  physi- 
cal or  mental  strain.  Now,  there  is  another  question 
which  should  also  be  considered  in  determining  the  proper 
length  of  a  working  day.  No  matter  how  light  the  work 
may  be,  how  little  the  mental  or  physical  strain,  there 
comes  a  limit  in  the  length  of  a  working  day  beyond  which 
you  cannot  go  without  invading  the  social  rights  of  the 
worker.  Every  worker  is  entitled  to  live  the  life  of  a 
human  being.  Every  worker  is  entitled  to  a  reasonable 
time  for  rest,  for  recreation,  for  self-improvement,  for 


APPENDIX  175 

social  diversion,  for  the  family  circle.  The  working  day 
may  be  so  long  as  to  invade  these  social  rights,  even  though 
the  mental  and  physical  strain  be  a  matter  of  little  conse- 
quence. It  is  the  opinion  of  the  court  that  a  nine-hour  day 
does  not  unduly  deprive  the  worker  of  these  social  privi- 
leges. Now,  the  mental  and  physical  strain  of  operating  a 
street  car  are  not  excessive.  There  are  no  unhealthy  con- 
ditions about  it,  there  are  no  obnoxious  fumes  or  gas,  there 
are  no  great  hazards,  there  is  no  severe  mental  strain. 
There  is  considerable  responsibility  and  some  skill  re- 
quired, but  the  men  are  sheltered  from  the  storm  and 
there  is  no  extreme  hardship  about  the  business.  In  con- 
sideration of  all  these  circumstances,  it  is  the  opinion  of 
the  court  that  the  nine-hour  day  in  this  particular  occupa- 
tion is  not  unfair  to  the  worker.  The  court  will  not,  there- 
fore, require  the  respondent  in  this  case  to  institute  an 
eight-hour-day  system. 

Some  specific  features  of  the  proposed  contract  are  sul)- 
mitted  to  us.  Section  2  of  the  contract  has  not  been  agreed 
to.  It  refers  to  the  num1)cr  of  men  which  shall  constitute 
a  crew,  and  provides  that  motormen  and  conductors  shall 
constitute  a  crew.  This  brings  up  the  question  of  the 
three-man  crew  on  freight  trains,  and  it  is  the  opinion  of 
the  court  that  section  2  should  Ije  agreed  to  by  the  men. 

Section  5,  in  the  opinion  of  the  court,  should  be  agreed 
to  with  the  last  sentence  thereof  stricken  out.  This  is  a 
minor  matter,  and  we  feel  that  the  rule  is  fair  with  the  last 
sentence  stricken  out. 

Section  6  should  be  accepted  and  agreed  to  with  the  fig- 
ure "8"  inserted  before  the  word  "hours"  in  the  first 
blank,  and  the  figure  "4"  inserted  before  the  word  "hours" 
in  the  second  blank.  This  will  provide  that  regular  pas- 
senger runs  shall  pay  not  less  than  eight  hours,  and  that 
any  park  nm  posted  on  the  board  shall  be  not  less  than 
four  hours. 


176  APPENDIX 

Another  important  matter  was  called  to  our  attention, 
and  that  is  the  length  of  the  working  day  for  freight-train 
crews.  The  evidence  shows  that  the  working  day  is  eleven 
hours,  with  time  and  a  half  for  over  time,  but  that  the 
average  working  day  is  much  more  than  eleven  hours, 
being  between  twelve  and  thirteen  hours.  Of  course,  this 
includes  the  noon  hour.  The  freight  crews  take  their 
lunches  with  them  and  stop  at  some  convenient  place  in 
their  work,  while  waiting  for  passing  trains,  or  for  other 
reasons,  on  the  sidetrack,  and  eat  their  lunches.  However, 
this  working  day  is  entirely  too  long.  It  is  so  long  as  to 
be  very  trying  upon  the  physical  strength  of  the  men  and  it 
encroaches  unduly  upon  their  social  rights.  The  circum- 
stances are  hard  to  adjust  to  a  reasonable  work-day.  The 
freight  business  of  the  road  is  so  small  and  the  circum- 
stances under  which  the  freight  business  is  conducted  are 
such  as  to  make  this  a  difficult  question.  Nevertheless,  this 
court  cannot  sanction  so  long  a  working  day.  It  is  so 
unfair  to  the  men  that,  as  a  matter  of  public  policy,  it 
should  not  be  permitted.  With  the  freight  crews,  how- 
ever, the  work  is  only  for  six  days  in  the  week,  so  that 
the  men  have  their  Sundays  free.  The  court  very  much 
regrets  its  inability  to  make  an  order  requiring  all  of  the 
employees  of  this  company  to  have  Sundays  off.  In  the 
matter  of  the  freight-train  crews  it  is  possible  to  have  the 
six-day  week.  In  view  of  all  the  facts,  it  is  the  opinion  of 
the  court  that  the  working  day  for  the  freight-train  crews 
should  be  on  the  basis  of  a  nine-hour  minimum  and  a  ten- 
hour  maximum,  including  the  lunch  period  in  the  middle 
of  the  day,  with  time  and  a  half  after  ten  hours. 

Section  7,  as  set  out  in  the  proposed  contract,  should  be 
stricken  out  and  the  following,  in  substance,  should  be 
substituted  therefor : 

"All  regular  freight  and  work-car  runs  shall  be  scheduled, 
when  possible,  on  a  basis  of  a  nine-hour  minimum  and  a  ten- 


APPENDIX  177 

and-one-half-hour  maximum  day,  with  nine  hours'  minimum 
pay,  except  on  holidays,  when  company's  freight  depots  are 
not  open  for  the  receipt  and  shipment  of  freight.  Overtime 
shall  be  paid  after  ten  hours.  On  holidays  the  freight  and 
work-car  crews  shall  be  given,  if  they  so  desire,  any  extra 
train  service  possible.  On  July  4  and  Labor  Day  freight  and 
work-car  crews  shall  be  subject  to  call  for  extra  work.  After 
a  trainman  has  worked  65  hours  in  regular  freight  or  work- 
car  service  in  any  six  consecutive  days,  he  shall  be  relieved, 
providing  competent  extra  men  are  available.  Extra  service 
and  extra  runs  shall  be  handled  as  provided  for  in  this 
contract." 

If  the  contract  shall  be  rewritten  so  as  to  include  the 
suggestions  of  this  court,  and  if  the  men  will  comply  with 
section  14  of  the  industrial  act  by  authorizing  in  writing 
some  person  as  their  agent  to  sign  for  them,  and  if  the 
contract  shall  be  executed  in  accordance  with  the  pro- 
visions of  said  section  14,  this  court  will  approve  the  same. 

W.  L.  HUGGINS, 

C.  M.  Reed, 
George  H.  Wark, 

Judges. 


IN  THE 
COURT  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS 

STATE  OF  KANSAS 

In  the  matter  of  the  investigation  concerning  the  continuity 
of  production  in  the  flour-milHng  industry  at  Topeka 
and  other  points  in  the  state  of  Kansas. 

Docket  No.  3,803 

OPINION 

December  20,  1920. 
By  Huggins,  Presiding  Judge 

This  is  an  original  investigation  instituted  by  the  court 
under  the  provisions  of  the  Kansas  industrial  law,  which 
confers  authority  and  jurisdiction  upon  the  Court  of  In- 
dustrial Relations  to  investigate  matters  afifecting  the  man- 
ufacture of  food  products.  Citations  were  issued  in  this 
investigation  and  served  upon  the  Topeka  Flour  Mills 
Company,  the  Shawnee  Milling  Company,  the  Ismert- 
Hincke  Milling  Company,  the  Interocean  Mills,  the 
Thos.  Page  Milling  Company,  the  Forbes  Milling  Com- 
pany, and  the  Kaw  Milling  Company — these  being  all  of 
the  flouring  mills  located  at  Topeka,  Kan. 

The  occasion  of  this  investigation  was  the  information, 
which  came  to  the  court  in  an  informal  way,  that  the 
flouring  mills  located  in  Topeka,  Kan.,  were  reducing  pro- 
duction.    The  seven  milling  companies  above  named  ap- 

178 


APPENDIX  179 

peared  in  court,  by  their  managing-  officers,  without  coun- 
sel, and  submitted  themselves  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
court  for  the  purposes  of  investigation.  A  preliminary 
investigation  was  had  on  December  3,  1920,  and  an  ad- 
journment was  taken  for'the  purpose  of  giving  the  millers 
time  in  which  to  prepare  certain  statistical  information 
from  their  books.  On  the  15th  day  of  December,  1920, 
the  investigation  was  resumed  and  an  entire  day  was 
spent  in  the  taking  of  testimony.  Tbe  millers  of  Topeka 
were  apparently  very  frank  with  the  court  and  supplied  all 
the  information  called  for  without  protest.  The  court 
now  feels  that  it  has  a  fairly  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
conditions  confronting  the  Topeka  mills.  The  court,  on 
its  own  motion,  also  took  the  testimony  of  a  number  of 
millers  from  other  parts  of  Kansas,  and  developed,  as 
fully  as  could  be  done  under  the  circumstances,  the  gen- 
eral milling  conditions  of  the  state.  The  testimony  shows 
a  great  variety  of  facts  which  will  be  hereinafter  discussed 
to  some  extent ;  but  the  big  outstanding  fact  seems  to  be 
that  there  has  been  no  cessation  of  operation  in  any  general 
sense,  but  that  owing  to  conditions  hereinafter  mentioned, 
the  mills  of  Kansas  generally  are  running  at  about  60  per 
cent  capacity.  This  60  per  cent  capacity  is  based  upon  a 
twenty- four-hour-per-day  operation.  It  will,  therefore, 
be  seen  that  the  mills  are  actually  operating  between  twelve 
and  fifteen  hours  per  day. 

Several  provisions  of  the  Kansas  industrial  law  should 
be  considered  in  arriving  at  a  conclusion  in  this  matter. 
The  legislature  declares  in  section  3  of  the  law  that  certain 
industries  and  vocations  are  "affected  with  a  public  in- 
terest," and  that  such  industries  and  vocations  are  there- 
fore "subject  to  supervision  Ijy  the  state  as  herein  pro- 
vided, for  the  purpose  of  preserving  the  public  peace, 
protecting  the  public  health,  preventing  industrial  strife, 
disorder  and  waste,  and  securing  the  regular  and  orderly 


l8o  APPENDIX 

conduct  of  the  businesses  directly  affecting  the  living  con- 
ditions of  the  people  of  this  state  and  in  the  promotion  of 
the  general  welfare." 

In  section  6  of  the  act  we  find  the  following :  "It  is 
hereby  declared  and  determined  to  be  necessary  for  the 
public  peace,  health,  and  general  welfare  that  the  indus- 
tries, employments,  public  utilities  and  common  carriers 
herein  specified  shall  be  operated  with  reasonable  con- 
tinuity and  efficiency  in  order  that  the  people  of  this  state 
may  live  in  peace  and  security  and  be  supplied  with  the 
necessaries  of  life."  The  same  section  prohibits  any  per- 
son, firm  or  corporation  from  hindering,  delaying,  limiting 
or  suspending  "such  continuous  and  efficient  operation  as 
aforesaid,  except  under  the  terms  and  provisions  provided 
in  this  act." 

Under  the  terms  or  provisions  of  section  i6  of  the  act 
it  is  provided  that  such  industries  as  "may  be  ordinarily 
affected  by  changes  in  seasons,  market  conditions,  or  other 
reasons  or  causes  inherent  in  the  nature  of  the  business," 
may  apply  to  the  court  for  an  order  fixing  rules,  regula- 
tions and  practices  to  govern  the  operation  of  such  indus- 
tries for  the  purpose  of  securing  the  best  service  to  the 
public  consistent  with  the  rights  of  employers  and  em- 
ployees engaged  in  the  operation  of  such  industries. 

By  section  20  of  the  act  it  is  provided  that  if  the  sus- 
pension, limitation  or  cessation  of  operation  of  any  such 
industry  shall  "seriously  affect  the  public  welfare  by  en- 
dangering the  public  peace  or  by  threatening  the  public 
health,"  then  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations  may,  under 
proper  proceedings,  take  over  the  operation  and  control  of 
such  industry  "during  such  emergency."  By  said  section 
20  it  is  also  provided  that  in  such  case  a  "fair  return  and 
compensation  shall  be  paid  to  the  owners  of  such  indus- 
try" during  the  time  of  such  operation  by  the  public 
authorities. 


APPENDIX  l8l 

By  section  9  of  the  act  we  find  the  following  declaration  : 
"It  is  hereby  declared  necessary  for  the  promotion  of  the 
general  welfare  that  the  workers  engaged  in  any  of  said 
industries  .  .  .  shall  receive  at  all  times  a  fair  wage  and 
have  healthful  and  moral  surroundings  while  engaged  in 
such  labor;  and  that  capital  invested  therein  shall  receive 
at  all  times  a  fair  return  to  the  owners  thereof." 

A  reasonably  careful  study  of  the  provisions  of  the  law 
above  cited  will  show  that  it  was  not  the  purpose  of  the 
legislature  to  invest  this  court  with  any  authority  to  take 
over  and  operate  the  business  except  in  case  of  great  pub- 
lic necessity — in  other  words,  in  case  of  an  emergency — 
and  that  the  regulatory  powers  provided  are  to  be  exer- 
cised by  this  court  in  the  spirit  of  fair  play  toward  the  in- 
dustry, toward  the  public,  and  toward  the  employee.  A 
"fair  wage,"  a  "fair  rate  of  return"  and  a  "reasonable 
continuity"  of  production,  to  the  end  that  "the  people  of 
this  state  may  live  in  peace  and  security  and  be  supplied 
with  the  necessaries  of  life" — these  are  the  o1)jects  of 
the  limited  regulatory  power  over  such  industries  con- 
ferred upon  this  court  by  the  legislature. 

About  one  year  ago  a  great  crisis  in  the  production  of 
fuel  occurred  in  this  state.  At  that  time  in  this  prairie 
state  of  Kansas  every  coal  mine  was  closed.  No  coal  was 
being  produced.  There  was  a  dire  shortage  of  fuel ;  the 
weather  was  extremely  cold.  Public  utilities  were  render- 
ing only  part  service  in  order  to  conserve  fuel ;  schools 
were  closing;  churches  had  ceased  to  hold  their  usual 
services;  even  the  sick  in  hospitals  were  in  danger  of  suf- 
fering from  the  cold.  In  practically  every  home  of  the 
state  great  care  was  being  taken  to  limit  the  consumption 
of  coal ;  in  many  places  people  were  standing  in  line  at  city 
offices  with  coal  cards  in  their  hands,  shivering  in  the 
winter  blast,  waiting  for  an  opportunity  to  procure  a  small 
quantity  of  coal  for  household  use.     So  great  was  the 


152  APPENDIX 

emergency  at  that  time  that  the  state  took  over  the  coal 
mines,  and  by  volunteer  labor  produced  coal  to  relieve  the 
immediate  necessities  of  the  people. 

The  conditions  of  the  flouring-mills  industry  in  Kansas 
at  this  time,  as  shown  by  tlie  evidence  in  this  case,  are  the 
direct  opposite  from  the  conditions  above  stated  with  ref- 
erence to  the  fuel  industry  one  year  ago.  The  evidence  in 
this  investigation  shows  that  the  elevators  in  most  instances 
are  full  of  wheat  waiting  to  be  milled ;  that  the  flour-stor- 
age capacity  of  the  mills  is  practically  full ;  that  the  price 
of  flour  is  falling  and  is  now  considerably  below  what  it 
was  three  months  earlier ;  that  the  grocery  stores  have  no 
trouble  in  getting  full  shipments  of  all  flour  orders ;  that 
the  mills  are  readily  accepting  all  orders  they  can  get  at 
current  prices,  and  promptly  shipping  out  the  same ;  and 
that  there  is  no  shortage  of  flour  anywhere  in  the  state. 
Furthermore,  the  evidence  shows  that  because  of  the  de- 
clining markets,  wholesale  and  retail  merchants  are  order- 
ing only  small  quantities  of  flour  for  immediate  needs  and 
that  housewives  are  buying  in  much  smaller  packages  than 
usual,  showing  that  the  general  feeling  of  the  public  seems 
to  be  that  there  will  be  a  still  farther  decline  in  the  price  of 
flour,  and  therefore  prudence  dictates  that  only  a  small 
quantity  should  be  purchased  at  the  present  price.  It  is 
apparent,  therefore,  that  there  is  no  public  emergency  in 
the  flour-milling  industry  at  this  time  such  as  would  war- 
rant the  intervention  of  the  court  to  take  over  the  opera- 
tion of  the  industry  as  provided  in  section  20  of  the  in- 
dustrial act.  The  only  remaining  question  then  is :  Are 
these  seven  milling  concerns  guilty  of  limiting  production 
"for  the  purpose  of  evading  the  provisions  or  intent  of 
this  act,"  or  to  "affect  prices"?  If  they  are  guilty  of 
such  unlawful  limitation  of  production,  then  an  order 
should  be  made  by  this  court  requiring  such  continuity  of 
production  as  may  be  proper,  and  if  said  order  be  dis- 


APPENDIX  183 

obeyed,  then  prosecution  should  be  instituted  under  the 
penal  features  of  the  law.  In  this  regard  the  Kansas  in- 
dustrial act  treats  capital  invested  in  the  essential  indus- 
tries more  severely  than  it  does  labor  engaged  in  the  same. 
The  law  specifically  provides  that  "nothing  in  this  act  shall 
be  construed  as  restricting  the  right  of  any  individual 
employee  ...  to  quit  his  employment  at  any  time."  In 
other  words,  the  legislature  recognized  capital  invested  in 
the  essential  industries  as  a  commodity,  while  labor  was 
regarded  on  a  very-  different  plane.  The  liberty  of  the 
laborer  to  work  or  not  to  work  as  he  may  choose  is  guar- 
anteed by  the  industrial  law,  while  the  right  of  capital  to 
close  down  and  cease  operations  is  regulated  by  the  law  in 
the  interest  of  the  public  welfare. 

A  "reasonable"  continuity  of  production  is  required  by 
the  statute.  The  word  "reasonable"  has  a  well-understood 
meaning,  and  no  legal  definition  can  clarify  it  to  any  great 
extent.  The  evidence  here  shows  an  average  operation 
of  more  than  twelve  hours  per  day.  The  evidence  shows 
that  such  operation  has  resulted,  and  is  resulting,  in  an 
adequate  supply  of  flour  to  fill  all  orders  and  an  adequate 
quantity-  of  flour  to  fully  and  completely  supply  the  public. 
Furthermore,  the  evidence  shows  that  90  per  cent  of  the 
cost  of  the  finished  product  is  the  original  cost  of  the  grain 
from  which  the  flour  is  made.  The  evidence  shows  such  a 
fall  and  fluctuation  in  the  price  of  wheat  as  to  cause  a 
corresponding  fall  in  the  price  of  flour.  This  fall  in  the 
price  of  flour  seems  to  account  for  the  slow  market  for 
the  same;  at  least  the  evidence  before  us  is  very  convinc- 
ing upon  that  point.  The  court  cannot  say  from  the  evi- 
dence before  it  that  these  mills  have  limited  production  for 
the  purpose  of  affecting  the  price  nor  that  the  operation  is 
not  being  conducted  with  reasonable  continuity. 

The  testimony  is  most  interesting.  It  throws  consider- 
able light  upon  world  market  conditions.    Many  elements 


184  APPENDIX 

seem  to  contribute  to  the  present  unsatisfactory  condition 
of  the  wheat  and  flour  market.  Among  others  may  be 
noted : 

1.  A  very  small  percentage — perhaps  five  or  ten  per 
cent — of  the  production  of  the  Kansas  mills  is  used  within 
the  state  of  Kansas.  The  Kansas  mills  depend  upon  the 
world's  market.  Kansas  mills,  even  since  the  close  of  the 
World  War,  have  been  selling  flour  in  several  countries  of 
South  America,  in  Mexico,  in  Egypt,  and  in  most  of  the 
countries  of  Europe,  as  well  as  in  the  eastern  portions  of 
the  United  States. 

2.  There  is  a  tremendous  surplus  of  the  Canadian  wheat 
crop,  which  is  now  being  marketed  to  a  considerable  ex- 
tent in  the  United  States  duty  free. 

3.  There  is  an  immense  wheat  crop  in  Australia  now 
being  harvested. 

4.  There  is  a  big  wheat  crop  in  the  Argentine  Republic, 
which  is  soon  to  be  harvested. 

5.  The  European  peoples  are  so  poverty  stricken  as  to 
make  them  poor  customers  for  American  flour. 

6.  There  is  a  differential  in  favor  of  wheat  shipments 
rather  than  flour  shipments  instituted  by  the  American 
Shipping  Board  (formerly  25  cents  per  hundred,  but 
recently  reduced  to  5  cents  per  hundred). 

7.  The  condition  of  foreign  exchange  makes  it  possible 
for  the  Canadian  wheat  merchant  to  sell  his  wheat  in  the 
States,  taking  back  American  dollars,  which  are  worth 
$1.10  in  Canadian  money. 

8.  There  are  reciprocal  trade  relations  between  Great 
Britain  and  Canada  wherel)y  the  British  banks  are  able  to 
use  the  pound  sterling  in  Canadian  trade  at  only  10  per 
cent  discount,  which  if  used  in  the  States  would  bear  a 
discount  rate  of  about  30  per  cent. 

9.  There  is  a  general  trade  policy  of  the  British  govern- 
ment whereby  substantial  preference  is  given  to  the  over- 


APPENDIX  185 

seas  dominions  of  the  British  empire  in  all  trade  relations, 
and  especially  as  to  ocean  traffic  upon  British  ships. 

All  these  questions  might  profitahly  engage  the  atten- 
tion of  the  greatest  statesmen  and  diplomats  of  the  world. 
The  members  of  this  court  do  not  feel  themselves  able  to 
accurately  judge  as  to  the  influence  which  may  be  exerted 
upon  the  wheat  and  flour  markets  by  these  various  cir- 
cumstances. As  stated  before,  the  evidence  along  these 
lines  was  very  interesting  and  seems  to  throw  some  light 
upon  the  causes  of  the  present  condition.  Unquestionably 
the  testimony  shows  that  the  millers  of  Kansas  are  con- 
fronted with  market  conditions  which  are  beyond  their 
control  and  beyond  the  control  of  this  court.  It  is  a  mar- 
ket condition  and  not  a  theory  which  afifects  the  flour-mill- 
ing industry  in  this  state. 

Another  very  important  question  connected  with  the 
matter  before  us  is  its  effect  upon  labor.  As  has  already 
been  stated  herein,  the  people  of  Kansas  have  solemnly 
declared  by  legislative  act  that  workers  engaged  in  this 
industry  shall  at  all  times  receive  a  fair  wage  and  have 
healthful  and  moral  surroundings.  In  the  reduction  of 
the  hours  of  operation,  therefore,  the  millers  should  be 
very  careful  and  solicitious  concerning  the  matter  of  labor. 
Skilled  and  faithful  employees  should  be  given  such  treat- 
ment as  will  enable  them  during  the  period  of  limited  pro- 
duction to  support  themselves  and  families. 

The  evidence  before  us  shows  that  in  the  Topeka  mills 
skilled  men  in  the  milling  business  are  being  paid  a 
monthly  wage,  and  are  therefore  drawing  pay  whether  the 
mill  is  running  or  not.  So  far  as  it  is  possil)le  to  do  so, 
this  rule  should  be  recognized  in  all  the  mills  of  the  state, 
for  it  is  necessary  in  the  promotion  of  the  general  welfare 
that  skilled  and  faithful  workers  should  always  be  avail- 
able for  these  essential  industries  which  so  vitally  affect 
the  living  conditions  of  the  people. 


l86  APPENDIX 

The  court  finds  from  the  evidence  in  this  case  that  the 
milling  industry  is  one  of  the  essential  industries  in  the 
sense  of  the  Kansas  statute,  and  subject  to  such  regula- 
tion as  is  necessary  to  protect  the  public  interest.  The 
court  further  finds  from  the  evidence  that  it  is  an  industry 
which  is  aflfected  by  market  conditions ;  that  such  influ- 
ences are  inherent  in  the  nature  of  the  business ;  and  that 
reasonable  rules,  regulation  and  practices  should  be  pre- 
scribed by  this  court  to  be  observed  in  the  operation  of  the 
industry  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  this  court  informed 
as  to  continuity  and  efficiency  of  production,  and  of  secur- 
ing the  best  service  to  the  public  consistent  with  the  ri.'^^hts 
of  employers  and  employees  engaged  in  its  operation  as 
provided  by  the  Kansas  industrial  Inv/. 

At  the  hearing  of  this  case  the  court  announced  that 
such  was  the  view  of  the  court  in  regard  to  this  industry. 
Some  objection  to  the  court's  taking  such  action  in  the 
premises  was  voiced  by  one  of  the  millers,  but.  on  the 
whole,  the  millers  present  seemed  favorable  to  the  plan 
of  the  court  to  prescribe  such  rules  and  regulations.  The 
court  at  the  conclusion  of  the  trial  appointed  a  committee 
composed  of  Mr.  G.  A.  Engh,  the  chief  accountant  of  this 
court;  Prof.  L.  A.  Fitz,  head  of  the  milling  department  of 
the  Kansas  State  Agricultural  College ;  and  C.  V.  Topping, 
secretary  of  the  Southwest  Millers'  Association.  These 
men  are  to  formulate  such  rules  and  regulations  as  might 
enable  the  court  to  keep  in  close  touch  with  the  milling 
industry,  and  to  aid  it  in  such  regulation  of  the  same  as 
might  be  necessary  from  time  to  time.  After  the  formu- 
lation of  the  rules  and  regulations,  the  same  will  be  con- 
sidered by  the  court,  and,  if  they  are  approved,  an  order 
will  be  made  accordingly. 

The  objects  of  this  investigation  having  been  accom- 
plished, this  phase  of  the  matter  will  now  be  closed.  If 
later  developments  should  make  it  seem  necessary  that  the 


APPENDIX  187 

court  take  further  action  in  the  premises,  such  action  will 
be  taken.  In  such  case  new  citations  will  be  issued.  The 
present  docket  will  be  closed  upon  the  approval  and  pro- 
mulgation of  the  rules  to  be  submitted  by  the  committee 
aforesaid. 

Judges  Reed  and  Wark  concur. 


IN  THE 
COURT  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS 

STATE  OF  KANSAS 

In  the  matter  of  the  appHcation  of  The  Fort  Scott  Sor- 
ghum-Syrup Company,  a  corporation,  of  Fort  Scott, 
Kansas,  for  an  order  modifying  the  terms  and  condi- 
tions of  contract  between  said  company  and  certain  of 
its  employees. 

Docket  No.  3885 

OPINION 

February  11,  1921. 
By  Huggins,  Presiding  Judge 

This  is  a  complaint  upon  the  part  of  the  Fort  Scott 
Sorghum-Syrup  Company,  a  corporation,  against  certain 
of  its  employees.  The  Fort  Scott  Sorghum-Syrup  Com- 
pany, hereinafter  called  the  company,  is  engaged  in  the 
manufacture  of  syrup  which  is  used  as  food  for  human 
beings.  It  also  manufactures  as  a  by-product  certain 
stock  foods,  but  its  principal  business  is  the  syrup  busi- 
ness. It  operates  a  plant  at  Fort  Scott,  Kan.,  and  another 
at  Pine  Blufif,  Ark.  Its  business  is  peculiar  in  that  its 
period  of  active  operation  covers  only  from  fifty  to  ninety 
days  in  the  fall  of  the  year.  During  that  time  the  com- 
pany runs  its  plant  twenty-four  hours  per  day  and  em- 

188 


APPENDIX  189 

ploys  something  more  than  one  hundred  men.  Sorghum 
cane  grown  by  farmers  within  a  radius  of  about  twenty- 
five  miles  of  Fort  Scott,  Kan.,  is  brought  into  the  plant 
either  by  railroad  or  truck.  During  that  time  many  thou- 
sands of  tons  of  cane  are  run  through  the  crushers  and 
the  juice  extracted  therefrom.  The  juice  is  in  turn  put 
through  a  refining  process  by  means  of  steam  until  it 
reaches  a  stage  in  which  it  can  be  stored  in  large  tanks 
and  preserved.  The  period  of  the  year  in  which  the  plant 
is  operated  at  full  capacity  is  called  the  "campaign." 
After  the  campaign  is  over  the  activity  of  the  plant  con- 
sists only  in  mixing  and  refining  the  syrup  and  preparing 
it  for  table  use.  It  is  then  shipped  out  on  orders  from 
jobbers  all  over  the  western  part  of  the  United  States 
from  Canada  to  Mexico,  and  from  the  Mississippi  to  the 
Pacific  coast.  The  average  annual  production  of  the  plant 
is  in  the  neighborhood  of  800,000  gallons  of  this  sorghum 
syrup,  which  is  known  throughout  the  country  as  the 
"Farmer  Jones  Sorghum  Syrup."  In  carrying  on  the  re- 
fining process  only  a  few  men  are  employed.  During  the 
campaign  a  battery  of  from  five  to  seven  steam  boilers 
and  engines  are  in  use,  but  during  the  refining  and  ship- 
ping process  only  one  is  necessary. 

On  July  15.  1920.  the  company  entered  into  a  contract 
with  the  International  Brotherhood  of  Firemen  and  Oil- 
ers, a  labor  union.  This  contract  is  what  is  known  as  a 
"closed-shop  agreement."  It  is  entered  into  by  Local 
Union  No.  412  of  the  International  Brotherhood  of  Fire- 
men and  Oilers  on  the  one  part  and  the  company  on  the 
other  part.  There  is  no  controversy  with  regard  to  wages, 
working  conditions,  nor  hours  of  labor.  Shortly  after  the 
campaign  was  over  in  the  fall  of  1920  a  question  arose 
with  regard  to  the  employment  of  firemen.  It  has  been  the 
custom  of  the  company  during  the  period  in  which  the 
plant  is  inactive  to  keep  a  chief  engineer  and  an  assistant 


190  APPENDIX 

engineer.  In  previous  years  it  has  also  kep.  a  fireman  and 
an  assistant  fireman.  The  testimony  shows  that  in  pre- 
vious years  it  has  had  work  for  the  four  men — two  engi- 
neers and  two  firemen — even  after  the  close  of  the  cam- 
paign, because  the  one  boiler  and  engine  was  kept  busy 
in  the  heating  of  the  plant,  the  heating  of  the  syrup,  and 
in  the  process  of  refining  and  mixing. 

The  evidence  shows,  however,  that  under  present  econ- 
omic conditions  the  plant,  since  the  end  of  the  campaign 
of  1920,  has  been  doing  only  about  four  or  five  per  cent  as 
much  business  as  it  had  done  upon  average  years.  This 
unprecedented  falling  ofif  in  the  business  done  by  the 
company  is  explained  by  the  superintendent  as  being  due 
to  general  trade  conditions  and  to  competition  with  other 
kinds  of  syrup,  which  has  made  it  impossible  for  this  com- 
pany to  sell  its  product  upon  the  market.  The  company, 
therefore,  discharged  the  two  firemen  and  proposed  to 
operate  the  one  engine  and  boiler  by  the  engineer  and  as- 
sistant engineer  on  their  respective  shifts,  acting  as  their 
own  firemen,  or,  in  other  words,  doing  two  jobs  at  once. 
The  chief  engineer  was  upon  the  witness  stand  in  the 
trial  of  the  case,  and  testified  that,  owing  to  the  very  little 
that  was  being  done  at  this  time,  he  could  easily  do  the 
work  of  both  the  engineer  and  fireman ;  that  the  task  of 
firing  the  engine  during  his  shift  would  not  require  to 
exceed  two  hours  of  his  time  in  a  day,  and  the  same  would 
be  true  with  the  assistant  engineer.  He  testified  that  he 
was  perfectly  willing  to  do  this  work  and  help  out  the 
company  during  the  slack  time.  However,  the  engineers' 
union  seem  to  have  warned  him  that  he  must  not  perform 
the  duties  of  the  fireman.  Thus  the  "one  man,  one  job" 
feature  came  into  controversy.  The  company  claims  that 
the  spirit  of  the  contract  is  that  the  local  union  of  firemen 
and  oilers  should  admit  to  membership,  without  cost,  the 
engineer  and  assistant  engineer,  who,  of  course,  are  quali- 


APPENDIX 


191 


fied  firemen,  so  that  they  might  perform  this  duty  without 
making  it  necessary  either  to  discharge  them  and  hire 
nonunion  men  or  to  violate  any  of  the  rules  of  the  union. 
No  such  provision,  however,  exists  in  the  contract.  Upon 
this  point  the  contract  is  silent.  The  failure  to  insert  such 
a  provision  seems  to  have  been  an  oversight  by  both 
parties. 

The  controversy  seems  to  narrow  itself  down  to  the 
question  whether  this  little  company  shall  be  required  at 
this  time,  with  its  business  practically  paralyzed,  to  pay 
out  twelve  dollars  per  day  for  men  who  will  each  be  re- 
quired to  do  only  two  hours'  work  per  day.  The  amount 
involved  is  insignificant,  but  the  principle  is  important. 
Here  is  a  little  plant  operating  under  very  adverse  con- 
ditions. It  is  shown  by  the  testimony  that  it  is  losing 
money  at  the  present  time,  and  while  twelve  dollars  per 
day  is  not  a  large  amount,  it  increases  the  deficit.  The 
rule  contended  for  by  the  local  union  would  cause  an 
economic  waste — small,  it  is  true,  but  nevertheless  a  waste. 
Lon  Richards,  general  representative  of  the  International 
Brotherhood  of  Firemen  and  Oilers,  who  was  present  at 
the  trial,  announced  in  open  court  that  it  was  his  belief 
that  the  local  officers  at  Fort  Scott  had  made  a  mistake, 
and  that  they  ought  to  consent  to  admit  the  two  engineers 
to  membership  and  thus  to  help  the  company  out.  Mr. 
Richards  announced  that  he  personally,  and  as  an  officer 
of  the  International  Brotherhood,  did  not  insist  upon  the 
"one  man,  one  job"  idea  under  present  conditions,  and 
that  he  believed  he  would  be  able  to  settle  the  matter  by 
making  a  trip  to  Fort  Scott  and  having  a  conference  with 
the  officers  of  the  local  union.  The  court  thereupon  an- 
nounced that  it  would  hold  the  matter  in  abeyance  until 
eflforts  had  been  made  to  settle  these  differences;  but  botli 
parties  stated  that  they  had  agreed  to  abide  by  the  order 
of  this  court  in  the  matter  and  insisted  that  the  court 


192  APPENDIX 

should  decide  the  case  in  order  that  the  points  might  be 
settled  and  could  be  followed  in  future  contracts. 

The  Kansas  industrial  law  recognizes  collective  bar- 
gaining. Section  14  of  the  act  points  out  the  manner  in 
which  contracts  of  this  kind  may  be  entered  into  and  be- 
come binding  upon  both  parties.  This  contract  is  such  a 
contract  as  is  contemplated  in  the  statute.  In  section  9  of 
the  act,  however,  it  is  provided : 

"The  right  of  every  person  to  make  his  own  choice  of  em- 
ployment, and  to  make  and  carry  out  fair,  just  and  reasonable 
contracts  and  agreements  of  employment,  is  hereby  recog- 
nized. If,  during  the  continuance  of  any  such  employment, 
the  terms  or  conditions  of  any  such  contract  or  agreement 
hereafter  entered  into  are  by  said  court,  in  any  action  or 
proceeding  properly  before  it  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act,  found  to  be  unfair,  unjust  or  unreasonable,  said  Court 
of  Industrial  Relations  may  by  proper  order  so  modify  the 
terms  and  conditions  thereof  so  that  they  will  be  and  remain 
fair,  just  and  reasonable  and  all  such  orders  shall  be  enforced 
as  in  this  act  provided." 

The  only  matter  in  this  contract  which  demands  atten- 
tion seems  to  be  the  question  of  the  "one  man,  one  job" 
feature.  Under  the  strict  terms  of  the  contract  the  com- 
pany would  be  left  to  the  choice  of  either  standing  for  the 
economic  waste  or  repudiating  the  contract  and  making 
its  business  an  "open  shop."  As  stated  before,  the  Kansas 
industrial  law  recognizes  the  closed  shop  by  mutual  agree- 
ment. The  law,  however,  penalizes  the  strike,  the  boycott, 
the  blacklist  and  the  lockout.  Therefore,  a  closed-shop 
condition  forced  upon  either  employers  or  employees  by 
means  of  intimidation  or  "economic  pressure"  cannot  law- 
fully exist  in  Kansas.  In  the  present  case  the  closed-shop 
agreement,  being  by  mutual  consent  and  free  from  any 
form  of  duress,  is  not  contrary  to  the  law ;  but  the  public 
has  an  interest  in  such  contracts   as  this,  because  any 


APPENDIX  193 

economic  waste  in  the  essential  industries,  if  long  con- 
tinued, must  be  paid  by  the  ultimate  consumer — the  gen- 
eral public.  It  is  unfair  to  the  public  that  two  men  should 
be  drawing  wages  for  doing  the  work  that  one  man  could 
easily  do.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  perfectly  proper  that  a 
labor  union  should  make  such  a  collective  bargain  as  this 
and  should  insist  upon  the  strict  observance  of  the  same 
by  the  company,  provided  there  is  nothing  unfair  to  the 
public  contained  in  the  bargain.  Even  the  "one  man,  one 
job"  principle  may  be  right  under  certain  conditions.  It 
would  be  right  if  it  were  invoked  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting skilled  men  from  being  demoted  and  compelled  to 
do  work  which  would  have  a  tendency  to  cause  deteriora- 
tion of  their  abilities  in  the  skilled  line  which  they  have 
chosen  and  for  which  they  have  fitted  themselves.  But  in 
this  case  no  svich  condition  exists.  The  sole  question  be- 
fore us  is  whether  the  rule  could  be  invoked  under  such 
conditions  as  to  cause  preventable  economic  waste. 

This  contract  was  entered  into  after  the  taking  etTect  of 
the  Kansas  industrial  law,  and  is,  therefore,  subject  to  the 
provisions  of  that  law.  Under  the  authority  conferred 
upon  this  court  by  section  9  of  the  industrial  act,  in  any 
proper  proceeding  this  court  may  order  the  modification  of 
the  contract  so  as  to  eliminate  anything  that  may  be  unfair, 
unjust  or  unreasonable.  It  is  the  opinion  of  the  court 
that  this  contract  should  be  modified  in  one  of  two  ways: 
first,  by  an  express  statement  that  to  avoid  economic  waste 
the  company  will  be  permitted  in  times  of  slack  work  to 
have  one  man  work  at  two  or  more  jobs,  provided  only 
that  the  terms  of  the  contract  with  regard  to  hours  of 
work  be  observed;  or,  second,  that  the  contract  should  be 
amended  so  as  to  provide  that  in  case  of  slack  work,  if  it 
becomes  necessary  to  avoid  economic  waste,  that  one  man 
should  be  permitted  to  work  at  two  or  more  jobs,  then 
such  employee  as  may  be  assigned  to  such  duties  may  be 


194  APPENDIX 

transferred  to  membership  in  this  union  without  cost  to  the 
man  or  to  the  company  and  may  continue  in  such  member- 
ship as  long  as  the  necessity  for  working  at  two  or  more 
jobs  shall  continue. 

An  order  will  issue  accordingly. 

Judges  Reed  and  Wark  concur. 


IN  THE 

COURT  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS 

STATE  OF  KANSAS 

W.  E.  May,  President;  Orville  A.  Chase,  Secretary; 
Hunter  Blair.  Treasurer,  of  Local  Union  176  of  the 
Amalgamated  Meat  Cutters  and  Butchers  Workmen  of 
North  America,  a  lahor  union,  Complainants, 
vs. 

The  Charles  Wolff  Packing  Company,  a  corporation. 
Respondent. 

Docket  No.  3926 

OPINION 

May  2,  1921. 
By  HuGGiNS,  Presiding  Judge. 

The  complaint  in  this  case  was  filed  on  January  19, 
192 1.  The  issues  were  joined  hy  the  filing  of  an  answer 
by  the  respondent  on  the  28th  day  of  January,  1921.  This 
case  has  been  delayed  far  beyond  what  is  usual  in  this 
court  because  of  changes  made  in  the  industrial  law  by 
the  legislature,  which  was  in  session  at  the  time  the  com- 
plaint was  filed  and  remained  in  session  until  about  the 
middle  of  March.  The  legislature  made  such  changes  as 
took  away  from  the  Industrial  Court  the  work  of  the  Pub- 
lic Utilities  Commission  ;  and  because  of  that  change  (Iktc 
was  a  change  in  the  personnel  of  the  court  and  in  the  per- 

195 


196  APPENDIX 

sonnel  of  the  working  force,  all  of  which  has  caused  some 
delay  herein. 

The  complainants  are  the  president,  secretary  and  treas- 
urer of  local  union  No.  176  of  the  Amalgamated  Meat 
Cutters'  and  Butchers'  Workmen  of  North  America,  a 
labor  union.  The  respondent  is  a  meat-packing  company, 
whose  plant  is  located  in  the  city  of  Topeka,  Kan.  The 
respondent's  business  consists  in  the  slaughtering  of  vari- 
ous kinds  of  live  stock  and  converting  the  said  live  stock 
into  meats  of  various  kinds  and  qualities,  lards,  oils  anl 
other  products,  all  or  nearly  all  of  which  are  used  as  food 
for  human  beings.  The  complainants  state  that  a  con- 
troversy has  arisen  between  the  respondent  and  its  em- 
ployees which,  at  the  time  of  the  filing  of  the  complaint, 
was  endangering  the  continuous  operation  and  efficiency  of 
the  plant,  and  thus  affecting  the  public  by  hindering,  de- 
laying or  possibly  entirely  suspending  the  operation  of  the 
plant  in  the  manufacture  of  such  commodities  necessary 
for  human  food  within  the  state  of  Kansas  and  within  the 
vicinity.  It  is  further  stated  in  the  complaint  that  the 
respondent  has  failed,  neglected  and  refused,  and  still 
fails,  neglects  and  refuses,  to  settle  the  matters  and  things 
involved  in  said  controversy;  and  that  if  said  controversy 
be  not  settled  it  will  lead  to  other  and  further  disputes 
and  will  produce  industrial  strife  and  disorder  and  en- 
danger the  public  peace,  the  public  health  and  the  general 
welfare. 

Specifically,  the  complaint  states  that  prior  to  January 
I,  192 1,  said  local  union  No.  176  and  its  members  were 
employed  by  the  respondent  under  the  terms  and  by  virtue 
of  a  written  contract  in  the  nature  of  a  collective  bargain ; 
that  said  contract  by  its  terms  would  expire  on  January 
I,  1921,  unless  renewed  by  the  parties.  That  on  January 
14,  1921,  the  respondent  gave  notice  to  the  complainants, 


APPENDIX  197 

through  their  said  officers  and  by  posted  notices,  that  said 
contract  would  not  be  renewed  for  another  year,  and  that 
respondent  has  refused  to  enter  into  any  contract  for  the 
government  or  control  of  future  employment  of  the  mem- 
bers of  said  union.  That  the  respondent,  on  the  14th  day 
of  January,  1921,  gave  notice  to  the  members  of  said  union 
and  to  other  employees  that  the  wages  had  been  cut ;  that 
said  cut  in  wages  would  range  in  the  different  employ- 
ments all  the  way  from  seven  and  one-half  cents  per  hour 
to  fifteen  cents  per  hour.  That  under  the  terms  of  said 
collective  contract  a  basic  day  of  eight  hours  was  recog- 
nized, and  there  was  a  guarantee  of  at  least  forty  hours 
per  week  employment  at  the  regular  rate  set  out  in  the 
schedules,  which  were  a  part  of  said  contract,  and  also 
that  overtime  from  and  after  the  eight  hours'  work  in  any 
one  day  should  be  paid  to  the  employees  at  the  rate  of 
time  and  one-half.  That  all  of  said  provisions  had  been 
abrogated  by  the  respondent;  and  that  at  the  time  of  the 
filing  of  the  complaint  there  was  no  basic  day  established 
and  no  stated  time  constituting  a  day's  work;  that  there 
was  no  guarantee  as  to  the  number  of  hours'  work  during 
the  week,  and  that  in  certain  of  the  skilled  emi)loyments 
other  modifications  had  been  made  which  reduced  the 
wage.  That  under  paragraph  10  of  the  contract  a  bonus 
of  five  cents  per  hour  in  addition  to  the  rates  set  out  in 
the  schedule  was  paid  to  all  permanent  employees  three 
times  a  year,  and  that  under  the  wage  scale  instituted  by 
the  respondent  at  the  expiration  of  said  contract  the  bonus 
had  been  entirely  taken  away.  The  complainants  pray  that 
the  court  take  jurisdiction  of  the  controversy  and  enter 
upon  a  full  investigation  of  the  dispute,  and  that  after 
said  hearing  the  court  make  an  order  fixing  a  fair  and 
reasonable  wage  for  the  complainants,  and  authorizing  and 
compelling  the  respondent  to  enter  into  a  contract  for  the 


198  APPENDIX 

continuance  of  service  of  its  employees  at  such  fair  and 
reasonable  rates,  and  for  such  other  relief  in  the  premises 
as  might  be  found  right  and  proper  under  the  industrial 
law  of  this  state.  The  complaint  is  verified  by  the  three 
officers  of  the  union  above  named. 

The  answer  of  the  respondent  contains :  ( i )  A  general 
denial;  (2)  an  admission  of  the  incorporation  of  the 
respondent  and  the  nature  of  its  business  substantially  as 
alleged  in  the  complaint ;  that  the  wage  contract  set  out  in 
the  complaint  was,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  entered  into  as 
alleged  and  that  its  terms  were  as  alleged,  but  that  it 
expired  and  ceased  to  have  any  binding  force  or  effect 
upon  either  of  the  parties  on  December  31,  1920;  (3)  an 
allegation  that  the  respondent  had  scrupulously  performed 
all  the  obligations  imposed  upon  it  by  the  terms  of  said 
contract;  (4)  denying  any  liability  under  the  bonus  clause 
contained  in  section  10  of  the  former  contract;  (5)  a 
statement  that  the  respondent  was  not  given  a  fair  oppor- 
tunity to  discuss  with  its  workers  the  provisions  of  any 
new  contract,  but  that  the  workers  presented  a  typewritten 
contract  and  demanded  signature  without  discussion;  (6) 
a  statement  that  if  there  be  anything  due  to  the  com- 
plainants by  virtue  of  the  former  contract  which  expired 
on  December  31,  1920,  the  respondent  is  able,  ready  and 
willing  to  pay  the  same  upon  the  order  of  any  court  of 
competent  jurisdiction;  (7)  an  allegation  that  the  busi- 
ness of  the  respondent  was  operated  during  the  year  1920 
at  a  loss  in  excess  of  $100,000.  and  that  a  continuance  of 
the  wages  provided  for  in  said  wage  agreement  would 
necessarily  result  in  confiscation  of  respondent's  property ; 
(8)  an  offer  on  the  part  of  the  respondent  to  open  up  its 
books,  accounts,  papers,  documents  and  business  to  the 
inspection  of  the  court  or  its  expert  accountants,  saving 
only  to  itself  proper  access  to  the  same  for  business  pur- 
poses during  the  progress  of  said  inspection;  (9)  a  denial 


APPENDIX  199 

of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  industrial  court  to  enter  any 
money  judgment  for  past-due  wages  under  the  terms  of 
said  contract,  if  any  should  be  found. 

The  respondent  then  prays  that  a  finding  and  order 
be  entered  by  the  court,  setting  forth  that  respondent's 
dealings  with  its  employees  have  been  just,  fair  and  rea- 
sonable and  that  no  grounds  exist  for  said  complaint,  and 
that  the  court  do  nothing  which  may  impair  respondent's 
ability  to  furnish  articles  of  food  for  human  consumption, 
and  to  furnish  an  open,  free  market  for  live  stock,  and 
that  the  respondent's  business  be  shielded  and  guarded 
against  any  interruption. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  trial  of  this  case  the  complain- 
ants asked  and  obtained  leave  of  court  to  file  an  amend- 
ment to  their  complaint.  In  this  amendment  they  com- 
plained that  women  workers  are  paid  a  much  lower  wage 
than  men  for  the  same  class  of  work,  and  ask  the  court 
to  make  an  order  fixing  the  wage  of  women  and  men  do- 
ing the  same  class  of  work  at  the  same  rate.  After  taking 
the  matter  under  consideration,  and  at  the  beginning  of  the 
second  day  of  the  trial,  the  respondent  in  open  court  con- 
sented that  any  order  made  herein  should  contain  a  pro- 
vision that  women  and  men  at  the  same  class  of  work 
should  receive  the  same  pay. 

Both  parties  to  the  controversy  also  in  open  court 
stated  that  the  business  of  the  respondent  had  always  been 
operated  upon  what  is  known  as  an  "open-shop"  basis, 
and  that  no  change  in  that  regard  was  desired  by  either 
party. 

The  complaint  herein  is  filed,  as  before  stated,  by  the 
officers  of  the  organized  workers,  luit  will  be  treated  by 
the  court  as  a  complaint  upon  behalf  of  all  employees  now 
engaged  or  hereafter  to  be  engaged  in  the  operation  of  the 
respondent's  plant  in  Topeka. 

At  the  trial  of  this  case  complainants  were  represented 


200  APPENDIX 

by  the  three  officers  of  the  local  union ;  by  a  Mr.  Joyce,  the 
general  auditor  of  the  international  union ;  and  by  Mr. 
Jimerson,  president  of  the  union  in  this  district,  composed 
of  Kansas  and  five  or  six  other  states.  They  were  also 
represented  by  the  attorney-general  of  the  state  of  Kansas 
and  by  an  attorney  appointed  by  the  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations.  The  respondent  appeared  by  its  president  and 
manager  and  its  counsel.  A  great  volume  of  testimony 
was  taken,  and  the  trial  of  the  case  occupied  the  attention 
of  the  court  for  seven  consecutive  days. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  in  this  opinion  to  recite  the 
evidence  in  any  detail.  The  evidence  shows  that  the  pres- 
ent plant  of  the  Charles  Wolff  Packing  Company  is  the 
consummation  of  the  life  work  of  Charles  Wolff,  senior, 
who  began  in  Topeka  nearly  fifty  years  ago  as  an  ordinary 
butcher,  buying  his  own  live  stock,  butchering  it  himself 
by  the  aid  of  a  few  helpers,  and  supplying  meat  to  the  local 
trade.  The  business  expanded  from  year  to  year  until 
finally  it  became  too  large  for  a  single  individual  to  handle 
successfully,  and  was  incorporated.  Charles  Wolff,  senior, 
died  a  few  years  ago,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son, 
Charles  Wolff,  junior,  the  present  managing  officer  of  the 
plant.  After  the  death  of  Charles  Wolff,  senior,  the  stock 
of  the  corporation  was  sold  to  what  is  known  as  the  Allied 
Packers,  a  corporation  owning  and  operating  packing 
plants  in  several  of  the  states  and  in  the  Dominion  of 
Canada.  The  evidence  shows  that  the  Wolff  management 
has  not  materially  changed,  and  that  Charles  Wolff,  junior, 
is  in  charge  of  the  business  at  this  time  and  is  conducting 
it  in  very  much  the  same  way  as  it  has  been  conducted  for 
many  years  past.  During  the  life  of  Charles  Wolff,  senior, 
the  employees  were  not  organized,  but  they  were  organized 
under  their  present  union  organization  about  two  years 
prior  to  the  filing  of  the  complaint  herein.  The  evidence 
further  shows  that  there  has  never  been  any  serious  con- 


APPENDIX  201 

troversy  between  the  management  and  the  employees  until 
the  present  time. 

A  large  amount  of  testimony  was  taken  with  reference 
to  the  present  cost  of  living  as  compared  with  the  same 
cost  one  year  ago.  There  is  a  conflict  in  this  testimony. 
The  complainants  contend  that  the  downward  trend  in  the 
cost  of  the  necessaries  of  life  has  not  materially  affected 
the  retail  trade  as  yet.  On  the  contrary,  the  evidence  of 
the  respondent  tends  to  show  that  there  has  been  a  reduc- 
tion in  the  cost  of  the  necessaries  and  comforts  of  life 
amounting  to  25  per  cent  or  more  within  the  past  twelve 
months. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  contract  of  employment  as  set 
out  in  the  complaint  was  entered  into  as  alleged  therein, 
and  that  wages  were  paid  in  accordance  therewith  and 
working  conditions  were  governed  thereby  from  the  ist  of 
January,  1920,  until  the  17th  of  January,  1921.  On  the 
latter  date  a  reduction  in  wages  was  made  by  the  respond- 
ent. The  evidence  shows  that  the  wage  cut  amounts,  on 
the  average  hourly  wage,  to  a  reduction  of  10^4  per  cent 
upon  the  wages  provided  for  under  the  contract.  This 
reduction,  however,  is  not  uniform.  In  some  of  the  posi- 
tions in  the  plant  the  wage  is  slightly  increased  by  the  new 
schedule,  while  in  others  it  is  reduced  considerably  more 
than  1034  per  cent. 

One  of  the  principal  contentions  in  the  evidence  is  the 
question  of  the  eight-hour  basic  day.  Upon  this  point  the 
evidence  shows  that  many  workers,  especially  those  en- 
gaged in  what  is  called  the  killing,  cutting  and  trimming 
departments,  are  in  the  very  nature  of  the  business  com- 
pelled to  work  under  conditions  which  are  disagreeable  and 
are  not  conducive  to  the  health  of  the  workers.  Some  of 
these  workers  are  standing  over  scalding  vats  in  rooms  that 
are  more  or  less  filled  with  steam  from  the  hot  water; 
others  are  working  under  conditions  which  require  them 


202  APPENDIX 

to  wear  rubber  boots  and  rubber  clothing  to  protect  them- 
selves from  blood,  water  and  steam ;  others  are  handling 
the  entrails  and  the  different  parts  of  the  carcasses  of  the 
slaughtered  animals  and  using  water  in  the  cleansing  proc- 
ess. While  the  evidence  shows  to  the  entire  satisfaction 
of  the  court  that  the  work  in  this  plant  is  done  under  the 
best  possible  conditions  of  cleanliness,  nevertheless  there 
is  about  the  work  that  which  not  only  requires  strenuous 
physical  exertion,  but  is  also  disagreeable  and  more  or  less 
unhealthful  in  other  respects. 

This  packing  plant  is  what  is  known  among  packers  as 
a  small  plant,  employing  between  300  and  400  people.  The 
help  is  shifted  from  one  position  to  another  as  the  neces- 
sities of  the  case  may  require,  so  that  it  is  very  difficult  to 
classify  and  to  separate  the  workers  who  are  required  to 
work  under  conditions  such  as  have  been  described  from 
those  who  have  more  favorable  positions.  In  this  plant, 
because  of  the  limited  number  of  men  employed,  the  men 
are  shifted  from  one  job  to  another  when  occasion  requires 
it.  For  instance,  a  man  may  be  employed  in  the  cattle- 
killing  gang  for  a  part  of  his  time,  and  then  may  be  trans- 
ferred to  some  other  department  when  his  services  are  no 
longer  needed  in  the  cattle-killing  department.  The  rate 
of  pay  may  be  different  in  the  two  employments.  This 
makes  the  wage  scale  a  complicated  matter. 

The  evidence  shows  also  that  the  workers  in  these  de- 
partments are  compelled  when  they  arrive  at  the  plant  in 
the  morning  to  take  off  their  ordinary  clothing  and  to  put 
on  clothing  which  will  protect  them  from  the  dampness 
and  from  direct  contact  with  the  carcasses  of  the  slaugh- 
tered animals  and  which  will  meet  the  requirements  of 
Federal  regulations  in  such  matters ;  and  before  they  leave 
at  night  they  must,  of  course,  change  back,  wash  them- 
selves, and  prepare  to  return  to  their  homes.  Now  this 
process,  which  occupies  the  time  of  the  employees  from 


APPENDIX  203 

thirty  minutes  to  an  hour  per  day,  is  done  on  the  em- 
ployees' own  time ;  the  hourly  wage  does  not  begin  until 
the  employee  gets  to  his  place  of  duty,  and  it  ends  when  he 
leaves  that  place  of  duty  after  the  day's  work  is  done.  To 
do  an  eight-hour  day's  work,  therefore,  workers  engaged 
in  this  occupation  are  required  to  be  inside  the  plant  at 
least  eight  and  one-half  hours  and  possibly  nine  hours  per 
day. 

In  view  of  all  these  matters,  it  is  the  opinion  of  the  court 
that  this  is  an  employment  in  which  eight  hours,  as  a  gen- 
eral rule,  should  constitute  a  day's  work. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  respondent's  evidence  shows  that 
it  is  unable  to  control  the  supply  of  live  stock.  Farmers 
and  stock  raisers  will  ship  in  the  live  stock  when  it  is 
ready  to  ship ;  and  so  in  spite  of  all  the  management  can 
do  to  keep  up  a  steady  supply,  there  will  be  times  when 
the  yards  fill  up  and  it  becomes  necessary  in  order  to  avoid 
great  loss  to  the  company  to  run  more  than  eight  hours  a 
day. 

A  sharp  conflict  in  the  evidence  took  place  upon  this 
proposition.  It  is  claimed  by  the  respondent  that  in  some 
instances  where  time  and  one-half  for  overtime  is  paid, 
employees,  and  especially  those  who  are  not  permanently 
employed  by  the  company,  will  "slack"  on  the  job  the 
seventh  and  eighth  hours  for  the  purpose  of  getting  over 
into  the  ninth  hour  to  get  the  high  pay.  Respondent  there- 
fore claims  that  the  extra  pay  for  overtime  is  a  reward  for 
slack  work  on  the  part  of  the  workers.  This  accusation 
is  bitterly  denied  by  the  comi)lainants.  who  claim  that  the 
workers  generally  would  prefer  the  eight-hour  day  at  the 
lower  wage  than  the  nine-hour  day  at  the  higher  wage. 
The  evidence  is  so  conflicting  that  the  court  must,  of 
course,  call  to  its  aid  its  general  knowledge  of  human 
nature. 

Overtime  should  not  be  considered  in  the  light  of  extra 


204  APPENDIX 

pay ;  the  wage  should  be  fair  on  the  eight-hour  basic  day. 
Overtime  should  be  considered  as  a  penalty  upon  the  com- 
pany to  prevent  the  long  hours  and  exhaustion  of  the 
workers.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  company  should 
not  be  penalized  when,  by  reason  of  circumstances  over 
which  it  has  no  control,  it  may  be  necessary  to  run  the 
plant  a  little  longer  than  the  eight-hour  day  in  order  to 
save  loss  which  would  otherwise  occur.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  must  be  some  provision  which  would  prevent 
the  management  from  taking  advantage  of  that  situation 
to  work  long  hours  for  the  mere  purpose  of  making  extra 
profits.  The  matter  of  overtime  should  also  be  so  adjusted 
that  it  would  not  be  a  temptation  to  an  unfaithful  em- 
ployee to  slack  his  work  dviring  the  eight-hour  period  in 
order  to  reap  the  reward  of  the  higher  wage  in  the  ninth 
and  tenth  hours. 

Another  serious  controversy  in  the  case  arises  over  the 
question  of  the  weekly  guarantee.  It  seems  from  the  evi- 
dence that  it  has  been  the  custom  of  packing  companies 
such  as  the  respondent  to  guarantee  to  its  workers  forty- 
four  hours  employment  per  week.  This  custom  never  has 
prevailed  in  the  respondent's  plant,  but  under  the  previous 
contract  there  was  a  guarantee  of  forty  hours  per  week. 
The  evidence  shows  that  the  plant  has  been  running  so 
continuously  prior  to  the  trial  of  this  case  that  the  matter 
of  the  guarantee  was  of  little  consequence;  but  the  com- 
plainants are  very  insistent  that  such  a  guarantee  shall  be 
provided.  The  theory  of  the  workers  is,  of  course,  that 
in  the  absence  of  such  a  guarantee  the  employees  are 
wholly  dependent  upon  the  continuity  of  operation.  If  the 
plant  operates  three  or  four  days  a  week  the  earnings  of 
the  workers  fall  so  low  that  it  is  impossible  for  them  to 
live  decently,  and  that  any  wage  fixed  by  this  court  might 
be  made  an  unfair  wage  by  the  company  limiting  its  opera- 
tion.   The  respondent,  on  the  other  hand,  claims  that  some 


APPENDIX  205 

of  its  workers,  and  especially  its  transient  workers  who 
remain  with  it  for  a  very  short  time,  take  advantage  of 
this  guarantee,  refusing  at  times  to  respond  when  they 
are  needed  for  work,  but  always  claiming  the  benefits  of 
the  guarantee  in  case  the  work  has  l^een  slack  and  they 
have  not  been  offered  the  forty  hours  per  week  employ- 
ment. The  respondent,  however,  frankly  states  that  it 
recognizes  that  the  regular  employees  must  be  given  such 
continuous  employment  as  will  enable  them  to  decently 
support  themselves.  The  respondent  in  this  connection 
stated  in  open  court  that  any  fair  and  reasonable  rule 
promulgated  in  the  order  will  be  observed  by  the  res- 
pondent. 

This  case  involves  one  of  the  most  serious  considera- 
tions in  connection  with  the  administration  of  the  indus- 
trial act.  The  respondent  is  not  a  public  utility ;  it  is  one 
of  those  industries  which  are  declared  to  be  impressed 
with  public  interest ;  but  the  court  has  no  power  to  regu- 
late the  prices  which  it  may  charge  for  its  commodities  as 
may  be  done  in  regard  to  public  utilities.  Therefore,  any 
order  made  by  this  court  fixing  a  wage  must  be  very  care- 
fully considered,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  respondent 
is  doing  business,  and  must  continue  to  do  business,  upon 
an  open  and  more  or  less  competitive  market,  and  in  view 
of  the  fact  that  the  plant  cannot  be  expected  to  operate 
for  any  long  period  of  time  at  a  loss.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  may  be  stated  that  there  is  an  irreducible  minimum  be- 
low which  workers  cannot  be  and  must  not  be  required  to 
work.  Unfortunately,  the  laboring  man  is  not  in  a  posi- 
tion to  take  advantage  of  rising  markets  or  prosperous 
conditions  to  make  a  big  profit  at  any  time.  This  the 
business  concern  may  do  and  often  does  do.  Just  at  the 
present  time  the  business  of  the  respondent,  as  shown  by 
the  evidence,  is  not  in  a  prosperous  condition.  It  is  ad- 
mitted,   however,    that   the   loss   which    occurred   to   tiie 


206  APPENDIX 

respondent  last  year  was  caused  by  world-wide  business 
conditions  which  are  believed  and  at  least  are  hoped  to  be 
temporary.  The  respondent  frankly  states  that  the  pros- 
pects for  the  coming  year  are  brighter,  and  it  is  hoped 
that  the  business  will  be  more  prosperous. 

The  industrial  law  of  this  state  is  intended  to  be  as  fair 
to  capital  as  it  is  to  labor.  It  is  specifically  declared  that 
it  is  necessary  in  the  promotion  of  the  general  welfare  that 
labor  employed  in  these  essential  industries  shall  receive  a 
fair  wage  and  that  capital  invested  therein  shall  receive  a 
fair  return.  Any  order  made  by  this  court,  after  having 
been  put  into  force  and  effect  for  a  period  of  sixty  days, 
may  be  reviewed  at  the  instance  of  either  party  and  addi- 
tional evidence  introduced  to  show  its  practicability,  its 
impracticability,  its  reasonableness  or  its  unreasonable- 
ness. The  order  made  in  this  case  at  this  time  will  be 
made  in  view  of  that  provision  of  the  law.  The  business 
conditions  of  the  day  are  unusual  and  unstable,  and  sixty 
days  or  ninety  days  may  bring  about  such  changes  as 
would  require  a  revision  of  any  order  made  herein. 
In  view  of  all  the  evidence  the  court  finds  that — 
(i)  In  this  industry  the  principles  of  the  open  shop,  as 
now  and  heretofore  existing  by  agreement  of  the  parties, 
should  be  approved  by  the  court  and  should  continue. 

(2)  Employees,  whether  organized  or  unorganized, 
should  receive  wages  as  shown  in  schedules  hereinafter 
set  out,  which  said  wages  the  court  finds  to  be  reasonable 
and  fair. 

(3)  A  basic  working  day  of  eight  hours  should  be  ob- 
served in  this  industry;  but  a  nine-hour  day  may  be  ob- 
served, not  to  exceed  two  days  in  any  one  week,  without 
penalty :  Provided,  however,  That  if  the  working  hours 
of  the  week  shall  exceed  forty-eight  in  number,  all  over 
forty-eight  should  be  paid  for  at  the  rate  of  time  and  one- 
half  ;  furthermore,  in  case  a  day  in  excess  of  the  eight- 


APPENDIX  207 

hour  day  shall  be  observed  more  than  two  days  in  any  one 
week,  all  over  eight  hours,  except  for  said  two  days  in 
said  week,  should  Ije  paid  for  at  tbe  rate  of  time  and  one- 
half,  even  though  the  working  hours  of  the  week  may  be 
forty-eight  hours  or  fewer. 

(4)  No  guarantee  of  time  per  week  is  specifically  found 
at  this  time;  but  sufficient  work  should  be  offered  to  the 
regular  employees  in  each  and  every  month  so  tbat  the 
monthly  earnings  of  regular  workers  will  be  sufficient  to 
constitute  a  fair  wage  under  the  Kansas  industrial  law,  as 
heretofore  defined  by  this  court. 

(5)  The  management  of  the  industry  should,  whenever 
possible,  notify  the  workers  in  case  tbe  plant  is  not  to 
operate  the  following  day,  by  bulletins  posted  at  the  time 
clock  prior  to  the  closing  hour,  and  if  that  be  impossible, 
then  by  signal  from  the  steam  whistle  the  following  morn- 
ing, to  make  it  unnecessary  for  workers  to  come  to  the 
plant  when  there  will  be  no  work. 

(6)  Hours  of  beginning  work  should  be  set  by  tbe  man- 
agement and  may  be  changed  when  lecessary;  but  reason- 
able notice  should  be  given  the  employees  of  changes. 

(7)  The  seniority  rule  as  heretofore  observed  in  the  in- 
dustry may  continue. 

(8)  Reasonable  rules  and  regulations  in  regard  to  con- 
duct about  the  plant  may  be  made  from  time  to  time  as 
the  same  may  be  necessary,  and  reasonable  notice  of  all 
such  should  be  given  by  posting  at  the  time  clock  or  per- 
sonal notice  to  employees. 

(9)  Women  workers  should  receive  the  same  wages  as 
men  engaged  in  the  same  class  and  kind  of  work. 

(10)  Toilets  and  dressing  rooms  used  by  tbe  women 
workers  should  be  in  charge  of  a  woman. 

(11)  Piece-work  rates  should  be  paid  in  accordance 
with  piece-work  schedule  herein  set  out. 

(12)  Minor  details  in  regard  to  work  and  wages  cannot 


208  APPENDIX 

be  set  out  in  an  order  of  this  court;  but  whenever  differ- 
ences arise  at  any  time  they  should  be  taken  up  by  the 
grievance  committee  of  the  employees  and  the  manage- 
ment, and  reasonable  time  should  be  allowed  for  considera- 
tion and  adjustment  of  the  dififerences. 

(13)  The  total  working  time  for  women  employees, 
inclusive  of  overtime,  should  not  exceed  fifty-four  hours 
in  any  one  week  and  not  more  than  nine  hours  in  any  one 
day. 

(14)  Workers  paid  by  the  week  or  day,  if  employed 
within  the  plant  and  not  within  the  office  or  sales  depart- 
ment, should  be  subject  to  hours  of  work  and  overtime  as 
other  employees  under  the  terms  of  finding  No.  3  hereof. 

(15)  In  view  of  the  reduction  in  the  cost  of  the  neces- 
sities and  the  comforts  of  life,  the  wages  hereinafter  set 
out  in  the  schedules  are,  in  the  opinion  of  the  court,  the 
equivalent  in  purchasing  power  of  the  wages  paid  under 
said  contract  of  1920. 

(16)  The  temporary  order  heretofore  made  in  this  case 
was  at  the  time  reasonable  and  fair  and  should  stand  and 
be  complied  with  by  the  respondent  company,  beginning 
on  the  date  of  said  temporary  order  and  continuing  until 
May  I,  1921. 

(17)  The  respondent  company  should,  within  a  rea- 
sonable time,  furnish  suitable  room  for  its  employees  in 
which  to  eat  their  mid-day  lunch,  well  ventilated  and  apart 
from  those  portions  of  the  packing  house  in  which  the 
work  of  slaughtering  animals  and  dressing  and  preparing 
the  packing  products  is  carried  on,  and  apart  from  toil- 
ets and  dressing  rooms. 

(18)  The  following  is  a  fair  and  reasonable  schedule  of 
minimum  wages  to  be  paid  by  the  respondent  company  to 
its  respective  employees,  effective  May  2,  1921,  to  wit: 


ORDERS  ISSUED  IN  FIRST  COAL 
INVESTIGATION 

In  April,  1920,  at  the  close  of  a  ten  days'  hearing  at 
Pittsburg  on  an  investigation  of  the  coal  mining  industry, 
the  Court  took  the  following  action : 

1.  The  evidence  showed  that  a  large  percentage  of  the 
miners  were  not  content  to  draw  their  wages  twice  a  month 
as  provided  by  law  but  for  various  reasons  would  draw 
between  pay  days,  amounting  to  practically  every  week. 
For  many  years  the  mine  operators  had  charged  ten  per 
cent  discount  to  every  miner  who  drew  wages  between  pay 
days.  This  ten  per  cent  discount  was  upon  money  which 
the  miner  had  already  earned  l)Ut  which,  under  the  law,  the 
operator  could  not  be  compelled  to  pay  until  a  week  later. 
This  ten  per  cent,  therefore,  would  amount  to  ten  per  cent 
a  week  or  520  per  cent  per  annum.  The  Court  ordered 
this  practice  stopped  and  fixed  a  minimum  charge  of  25 
per  cent  to  cover  extra  bookkeeping  expenses  with  a  maxi- 
mum of  two  per  cent  for  the  larger  amounts. 

2.  The  award  of  the  Federal  Bituminous  Coal  Commis- 
sion had  left  the  question  of  the  price  of  powder  and  other 
explosives  purchased  by  the  miners  from  the  operators 
open  for  adjustment.  The  operators  immediately  put  up 
the  price,  causing  many  of  the  mines  to  close  down  because 
the  men  refused  to  work  under  this  uncertainty.  The 
Court  ordered  the  operators  to  furnish  these  materials  at 
the  old  price  until  a  reasonal)le  time  had  elapsed  for  meet- 
ings of  committees,  etc.,  to  determine  the  matter  amicably, 
if  possible;  if  not,  to  submit  it  to  the  Court. 

209 


2IO  APPENDIX 

3.  The  evidence  before  the  Court  showed  that  the  check- 
off system  had  been  used  to  collect  large  sums  of  money  by 
the  way  of  fines  and  other  assessments  and  that  large  sums 
of  this  money  collected  from  the  men  who  worked  under- 
ground had  been  used  unlawfully  by  the  district  officers. 
$10,000  of  it  had  been  handed  over  to  a  socialist  paper 
published  in  the  state  of  Oklahoma,  although  the  evidence 
showed  that  many  miners  were  republicans  or  democrats 
and  only  a  part  of  the  miners  adhered  to  the  socialist 
faith.  The  evidence  also  showed  that  an  amendment  to 
the  constitution  had  been  voted  upon  by  the  District  Con- 
vention, imposing  a  fine  of  $50  upon  any  miner  who  ap- 
pealed to  the  Court  of  Industrial  Relations,  and  $5,000 
fine  against  any  local  union  officer  who  might  do  likewise. 
Upon  this  showing  the  Court  ordered  the  operators  to  use 
the  check-off  system  only  for  the  purpose  of  collecting 
union  dues  and  sick  and  death  benefits  and  such  nominal 
fines  as  might  be  imposed  for  disciplinary  purposes,  but 
to  collect  no  fines  other  than  those  except  upon  written 
order  of  the  union  officers,  showing  the  reason  for  their 
imposition.    The  operators  are  obeying  this  order. 


THE  COURT  OF  THE  PENNILESS  MAN 

During  the  first  session  of  the  Kansas  Court  of  Indus- 
trial Relations  held  in  the  coal  mining  district  at  Pittsburg, 
Kansas,  the  local  bar  association  gave  a  dinner  in  honor 
of  the  Court.  Wm.  L.  Huggins,  the  presiding  judge, 
responding  to  the  toast,  "The  Court  of  Industrial  Rela- 
tions," said  in  part : 

"This  court  is  known  as  the  'Court  of  Industrial 
Relations.'  It  might  properly  be  called  the  'Court  of  the 
Penniless  Man.'  The  legislature  of  the  state  of  Kansas, 
out  of  deference  to  labor,  created  a  tribunal  in  which 
justice  is  administered  without  money  and  without  price. 
The  poorest  man  in  Kansas,  if  he  is  engaged  in  any  of 
the  essential  industries  named  in  the  law,  may  at  any  time 
come  into  this  court  and  make  his  complaint  known.  The 
state  provides  him  with  a  lawyer  who  will  prepare  his 
case  for  him  without  charge.  It  provides  him  with  expert 
accountants  and  engineers,  and  with  trained  examiners, 
who  will  investigate  his  case  and  prepare  his  evidence  for 
him,  free  of  charge.  He  is  not  required  to  put  up  a  bond 
for  costs,  nor  to  pay  his  own  witnesses.  He  is  supplied 
by  the  state  with  everything  he  needs  in  the  way  of  expert 
advice  and  assistance.  The  law  enjoins  upon  the  Court 
of  Industrial  Relations  that  it  shall  do  all  things  necessary 
to  develop  the  facts  in  the  case. 

"The  law  does  more  than  this  for  the  laboring  man. 
It  provides  that,  if  after  the  Court  of  Industrial  Rekitions 
has  rendered  its  decision  and  made  its  order,  the  laborer 
is  dissatisfied,  he  may  take  the  matter  before  the  Supreme 

211 


212'  APPENDIX 

Court  of  the  state  of  Kansas,  the  highest  court  in  the  state 
and  as  good  a  court  as  there  is  in  the  United  States  of 
America.  In  case  he  desires  to  take  his  grievance  before 
the  Supreme  Court,  the  evidence  which  the  state  helped 
him  prepare  and  introduce  in  the  Court  of  Industrial 
Relations  is  transcribed  by  an  expert  reporter  for  him, 
paid  by  the  state,  and  so  he  goes  with  his  grievance, 
and  with  all  his  evidence,  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
state  of  Kansas  still  without  a  penny's  cost.  The  legis- 
lature has  commanded  this  court  to  investigate  his  living 
and  working  conditions,  and  so  even  the  wife  and  children 
of  the  laboring  man,  if  they  desire  to  do  so,  can  come  into 
this  court  with  the  same  complaint  and  receive  the  same 
treatment. 

WHAT  IS  A  FAIR  WAGE? 

"The  law  does  more  than  this  for  the  laboring  man.  It 
expressly  declares  that  it  is  necessary  for  the  general 
welfare  that  workers,  engaged  in  the  essential  industries, 
shall  receive  a  fair  wage  and  have  moral  and  healthful 
surroundings  while  engaged  in  such  labor.  This  raises 
the  question:  'What  is  a  fair  wage?'  A  wage  which  only 
enables  the  frugal  and  industrious  man  to  provide  himself, 
and  those  necessarily  dependent  upon  him,  with  food 
enough  to  sustain  life  and  with  such  clothing  and  shelter 
as  is  necessary  to  preserve  health,  is  not  a  fair  wage  in 
the  American  sense.  A  fair  wage  is  more  than  that.  A 
fair  wage  must  provide  a  sufficient  return,  so  that  an 
honest,  industrious,  and  frugal  man  will  be  enabled  to 
procure  for  himself  and  his  family  all  the  necessaries 
and  a  reasonable  share  of  the  comforts  of  life;  that  will 
enable  him  by  industry  and  economy  not  only  to  provide 
himself  and  wife  with  opportunities  for  intellectual  ad- 
vantages and  reasonable  recreation,  but  also  will  enable 
the  parents  working  together  to  furnish  to  the  children 


APPENDIX  213 

ample  opportunities  for  intellectual  and  moral  advance- 
ment, for  education,  and  for  an  equal  opportunity  in  the 
race  of  life.  A  fair  wage,  in  the  American  sense  of  the 
term,  will  also  allow  the  frugal  man  to  provide  reasonably 
for  sickness  and  old  age. 

"I  have  never  heard  of  any  such  a  court  before.  I 
have  never  heard  of  any  legislature  or  parliament  in  any 
country  in  the  world  that  has  created  such  a  tribunal,  into 
which  the  poorest  citizen  may  come  and  receive  the  same 
treatment,  and  the  same  advantages,  and  the  same  justice, 
as  though  he  were  a  millionaire.  I  know  of  no  other  state 
that  has  by  law  required  that  every  industrious  and 
faithful  worker  shall  receive  a  fair  wage. 

"The  only  surj)rise  that  I  have  had,  with  regard  to  this 
legislation  and  this  court,  has  been  the  surprise  which  has 
come  to  me  when  I  have  learned  that  men  who  are  re- 
ceiving salaries  from  labor  unions,  and  who  are  under 
the  strongest  moral  obligation  to  use  their  utmost  en- 
deavors to  promote  the  best  interests  of  the  real  workers 
of  the  land,  have  denounced  the  court  and  the  law  as  an 
instrument  of  oppression.  This  position  on  the  part  of 
certain  highly  paid  officials  of  labor  organizations  is,  to 
me,  simply  astounding." 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


UCLAJoung   Rese^,ch   L.brary 

HD5504.K2   H8 


L   009   540   048   7 


Of^iViLh^jj     Of- CALIFORNIA 
LIBRARY 

LOS  ANGELES.  CAUP. 


